When Traditional Boundaries are Meaningless

By Charles Moncrief

As Domestic Violence Awareness Month has ended, maybe we can keep from allowing the public eye to close on this scourge. Here’s my contribution to that effort.

It’s a special treat to me when asked to give the Children’s Sermon because I’m far more likely to use props than when preaching to adults.

Several years ago I visited a hospital nursery with a tape recorder. (Yes, I know, I’m dating myself!) The nurses allowed me to record the crying of several infants, to get samples from different social, ethnic, and economic backgrounds. The following Sunday, the children came up and sat with me in front of the congregation. First, I played a few of the samples with a one-second pause between them.

Then I played back three of them, pausing to let the children reflect on what they heard.

Then I asked the children to identify the little girl.

Then I asked the children to identify the Asian boy.

Then I asked the children to identify the baby from the rich family.

The children couldn’t tell which was which.


Finally, I replayed the three tapes and again asked them to tell me the difference between the infants’ crying sounds.

You’d think I scripted their answer: “We don’t know.”

Now please fast-forward with me twenty, thirty, or forty years. Put on a blindfold and listen to the outcry of a person suffering from abuse.

Did the cry come from a White woman?

Did the cry come from a Black woman?

Did the cry come from an Asian woman?

Did the cry come from a bride?

Did the cry come from a woman in poverty?

Did the cry come from a Middle-class woman?

Did the cry come from a wealthy woman?

Did the cry come from the wife of a soldier?

Did the cry come from woman serving in the military?

Did the cry come from a Debutante?

Did the cry come from a man?


Do you know?


Grace and Peace,

Charles+

Anglican Priest, Charles Moncrief, serves up the issues of the day on a platter mixed with scripture, seriousness, and a sense of humor to create a ministry founded in love for his fellow man.

“I’m an Anglican Priest, disguised as a geek during the week. It’s REALLY tough to change my costume, since phone booths are getting hard to find!” 

Pastors, Stay Off of God’s Turf!

By Charles Moncrief

A recent announcement by the National Football League has raised nearly everyone’s awareness of domestic violence. Many other organizations are examining their own policies and are publicizing their own refusal to tolerate this savage, barbaric brutality. My hope and prayer is that all organizations will review and take action about the way they respond during this brief moment before the public eye again closes.

After listening to too many clergy, it’s obvious something needs to be done within the Church as well. Since most of my colleagues believe they know a lot more about this subject than I do, it’s obvious that they’re not interested in anything I have to say.

A dysfunctional couple became even more so after a priest counseled them with “Go to mass more often.”

A guest host on Susan Murphy Milano’s Blog Talk Radio show took a call from one battered woman who said her pastor told her that she should be more available to perform her wifely duties for her husband.

Clergy such as these are out of my league. Women on the receiving end of counsel like this will one day observe, figuratively, the bodies of such men floating down the river beside which they weep.

Lest this be seen as an unfair and vicious broad-brush assault on clergy, let me be clear on two points. First, very few of my colleagues are like this; most of them are godly and effective in pastoral caregiving. Second, very few of them are giving such advice out of malice and wickedness. It’s often ignorance that results from generations of untested mentoring. And quite honestly, I’ve benefited from some of them who on occasion rebuked my challenges. And I do agree that in principle, being part of a faith community is important for mutual support and accountability.

Many of the priests and pastors who are out of my league are the ones who “run the shop” (my irreverent term, along with “pulpiteers”, for senior congregational clergy). After years in their positions, they are generally receptive to what they hear from other senior-level store minders rather than to my suggestions. My prayer is that someone they respect, at clergy conferences or while eating thin sandwiches at tea parties, will get their attention.

For my part, I’ve chosen to focus on those candidates preparing for the ordained ministry. Or whenever possible, I’m taking aim at young men and women even before they start down that path!

First of all, I subscribe to the wisdom of B. Sidney Sanders, retired Bishop of East Carolina and former chaplain at a seminary I once attended. Sid’s words to those aspiring to the ordained ministry were some variation of these: “If you can find fulfillment in any occupation other than the ordained ministry, then for God’s sake and your own, please pursue that other occupation.” I agree wholeheartedly! I’m 100% suspicious of anyone who says “I want to be a minister.” But I’m 100% supportive of those who have stopped fighting God and running from His call on their lives.

When I’ve preached for candidates in their ordination services, my sermons fit the 3-point model: to honor God, to pray and read their Bible, and to behave themselves. My style is to put the core of my message into two broad topics. To illustrate, I’ll share the draft of an actual core. We pick up right after I’ve told them that this is their final opportunity to bow out, which they can do without shame and without dishonor.

TAKE THOU AUTHORITY

In a few minutes the Bishop will lay his hands on your head and claim that God has made you a Priest in His Church. The Bishop will then make a series of statements that begin with the words “Take Thou Authority”. Listen to those words. And pay attention to the reality that accompanies those words. I’ll speak this to you now. “Take Thou ACCOUNTABILITY.” In this service it’s tempting for you to regard all these words as a mere formality. In fact, sadly I’ve heard just such counsel given to candidates when taking their vows. But know this. The colleagues who attend these proceedings, and who will do their utmost to support you in your ministry, these same colleagues will be called upon to move against you should you prove false to your vows. And if they don’t, I’ll move against them!

People look to a minister as a person of authority. And rightly so. Whether they believe as you do or not, others acknowledge your belief in and accountability to a higher power. And most importantly, they believe it to be of your own free will. Even the enemies of God and your commitment to Him, far more often than not, allow you to pass unchallenged through doorways closed to most. Often, doors are opened for you by total strangers.

A woman sitting next to you on an airline flight will open the door of her heart and mind with some bitter relationship experience that has destroyed her world. TAKE THOU AUTHORITY to guard her trust that you will protect her sacred space. TAKE THOU ACCOUNTABILITY.

An interstate truck driver twice your size will collapse sobbing into your arms because he killed four people in a car that ran a red light in front of him. TAKE THOU AUTHORITY to guard this man’s human side. TAKE THOU ACCOUNTABILITY.

On a rare occasion both the husband and the wife will sit in your presence after one of them has literally or figuratively beaten the daylights out of the other. TAKE THOU AUTHORITY to be a bold and non-judgmental presence to both of them. TAKE THOU ACCOUNTABILITY.

You’ve prepared and polished a whiz-bang sermon to impart your wisdom to the people in your congregation. But you stand in the pulpit facing a congregation in shock because of an event like 9-11 on the previous Tuesday*. TAKE THOU AUTHORITY to tear up your manuscript and speak to the hearts and minds of these people. TAKE THOU ACCOUNTABILITY.

Nothing you say, in a counseling session or in the pulpit, will ever be completely accepted. TAKE THOU AUTHORITY and TAKE THOU ACCOUNTABILITY to field the justly deserved rebukes as well as the cheap shots that come against you for anything whatsoever that you say. Respond to all of them with love.

Above all, as you reflect on any authority you have in your ministry, never forget that this authority was conferred. Not earned. Not awarded. It was placed in your hands by God’s grace, through the agency of His faith community, for a purpose greater than you yourself will ever be.

STAY OFF OF GOD’S TURF

My favorite choice of texts for this warning comes from the first half of Matthew 6:12, "And forgive us our trespasses." These words are the most effective translation our poor English language can make of the original Aramaic words of Jesus, “Washboqlan khaubayn.” Allow me to use these words in terms of stepping over some boundary and getting caught on God’s turf.

One of the greatest mistakes you can make as a minister is to get so far onto God’s turf that no amount of scrambling will get you back off of it. Trust me! God’s grace is the only way for you to get off.

No one is warning you against becoming some sort of arrogant little tin god. You’re probably still chafing over the countless times your seminary professors and fellow students have rebuked your temerity, so you’re a few years away from THIS danger!

In getting onto God’s turf, I’m speaking of these things:

• Taking onto yourself the tasks that you can’t do alone
• Believing that your seminary studies, your clinical pastoral education (CPE), and your internship are adequate to carry you through your entire career
• Believing that you can subsist on professional relationships only within your own denomination or jurisdiction
• Believing that “Read your Bible more” and “Do your Daily Office” and “Go to mass more” are cure-alls for the needs of those who look desperately to you for a word from God
• Believing that yesterday’s answers, even the ones you gave so effectively, are adequate for today
• Believing that as a senior pastor you have all the resources within you to help people with their major issues

I want to address the last two more than any other, focusing on domestic violence.

A few weeks ago I cringed when a preacher said “If you’re suffering from domestic violence, come see me or Pastor Bob.” The implication was that since they’re the senior pastors, they can take care of all that ails you.

There was no reference in that sermon to the idea that these clergy have been to continuing education, especially in the field of domestic violence. The reality is that when you’re running the shop, the demands of the job and of your family life actually prevent you from staying up-to-date on any pastoral discipline. And domestic violence is one of the big ones.

You must participate in a community of clergy and secular specialists who have greater skill and specialty than you do. And you must be willing to defer to someone, even in another denomination or jurisdiction, even non-Christians, who can often address subjects that you yourself cannot.

You can’t just go into your closet and pray that God will give you what you need when you’re presented with a pastoral challenge. You need a lot more of the resources available than your own dependence on the spiritual insights you receive this way.

You absolutely must realize that you don’t have all the answers. And you absolutely must realize that the strength God makes available to you exists in others:

• Clergy outside of your background
• Police
• Medical and mental health professionals
• Veterans of domestic violence
• Blog sites such as this one (including all of the links in the articles)

You will, first and last, be unequal to the mantle you wear whenever you try to take too much on yourself.

CONCLUSION

Step forward in faith and trust. I guarantee you’ll not come through the experience unscathed. But

THOU AUTHORITY

TAKE THOU ACCOUNTABILITY

and

STAY OFF OF GOD’S TURF

Grace and Peace,

Charles+

*Allow me to share a personal experience. I’ve made it a footnote because it’s off-topic.

The Sunday after the 9-11 attack I was scheduled to fill in for a friend on vacation. The scheduled reading included a passage from Exodus 32:9-10, in which God tells Moses

Your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have acted perversely; they have been quick to turn aside from the way that I commanded them; they have cast for themselves an image of a calf, and have worshiped and sacrificed to it, and said, “These are your gods!" I have seen this people, how stiff-necked they are. Now let my wrath burn hot against them and I may consume them.

Many of my colleagues removed this from the schedule. My efforts to do the same were unsuccessful, so it fell upon me to preach to the congregation after one of their members boldly read this text.

The congregation, upon hearing the passage, had no trouble reading the obvious parallel:

Americans, you were brought up from religious persecution in the early 1600s. You have acted perversely; you have been quick to turn aside from the way that I commanded; you have cast for themselves your own idols of pornography and drugs and sports figures and despicable forms of entertainment, and have worshiped and sacrificed to them, and said, “These are your gods!" I have seen how stiff-necked you are. Now let my wrath burn hot against you as I throw airplanes into your tall temples!

I’m not going to go into details, but my pastoral requirement was not to shrink from the words presented to them: to obey my ordination command: TAKE THOU AUTHORITY. The saving grace came from reading the entire passage.

Anglican Priest, Charles Moncrief, serves up the issues of the day on a platter mixed with scripture, seriousness, and a sense of humor to create a ministry founded in love for his fellow man.

“I’m an Anglican Priest, disguised as a geek during the week. It’s REALLY tough to change my costume, since phone booths are getting hard to find!” 

Fine for Now, But What About Later?

by Charles Moncrief

If you drink this water, you will die. ~ Jack Sheffield, Under Healing Wings, p. 90 

Jack Sheffield is also a Priest, a leader in the Order of St. Luke (healing ministry), and a personal friend. The opening line above comes from a story he shares about a man whose car broke down while he was driving alone in the desert. Seeing a building in the distance and thinking it to be someone’s cabin, he walked toward it. By the time he arrived, he was about to die of thirst. The building was actually a shack with a water pump inside, exactly what he needed. Sitting on top of the pump was a can of water. As the man reached for the can, he saw a sign that read: 

DO NOT DRINK THE WATER IN THE CAN. THERE IS JUST ENOUGH WATER TO PRIME THE PUMP. IF YOU DRINK THIS WATER, YOU WILL DIE. IF YOU PRIME THE PUMP WITH THIS WATER, YOU WILL LIVE. 

What brought this story to mind is that six weeks ago I was in the hospital beginning treatments for pulmonary embolism. Yesterday morning I returned to the fitness center where I work, easing back into an exercise program. As I walked 2 miles per hour for ten minutes, it occurred to me that I could do quite a bit more. Then another thought came to me, something like this: “Of course you can, but which boss will find you asleep at your desk this afternoon?” (I did manage to stay awake after that wimpy treadmill action, but it was iffy.) 

Both Jack’s story and my personal experience served as object lessons to me on the tension between immediate and deferred gratification. Whether we satisfy our thirst once, or we get the rush of endorphins from a vigorous workout, the immediate satisfaction comes with a price later. With one comes death from thirst as we search in vain for the next water source, and with the other comes a reprimand (in this economy!) for sleeping on the job later. 

The idea of deferring a small immediate or near-term satisfaction in favor of greater rewards later is not new. 

Here are some examples:

• A wise parent refuses to let the child have a tasty afternoon snack, because there’s a delicious dessert following dinner. 
• A wise coach refuses to allow the football players to go out celebrating the night before a bowl game, because the victory may otherwise go to the opponent. 
• A wise farmer never eats the seed corn, because next year’s harvest depends on planting the corn rather than consuming it. 
• A wise consumer counts the cost of financing that new car and weighs the advantages of accumulating the money to pay cash rather than being stressed out with monthly payents for several years. 

Since I'm a Priest, I'll throw in a couple of examples from my industry. 

A man and woman who abstain from having sex until their wedding night have deferred the immediate satisfaction of their wants (no, not their needs!) in favor of increasing their chances of a more fulfilling sex life in the marriage bed. Granted, many other factors come into play here, and I recommend taking advantage of all resources that support a fulfilling marriage. I'm making no apologies, however, for advocating chastity. Especially in a forum such as this one; a number of submissions by other writers have submitted pieces in which sex outside of marriage played a significant part in the injuries and deaths of abused partners. 

Of course, if I were preaching a sermon on the topic, or doing Christian premarital counseling, it’s a no-brainer to speak of offending God by committing adultery; chasing the immediate sexual satisfaction may be symptomatic of a life heading toward eternal consequence. 

In my preaching I have occasionally admitted that there’s no way to be all-inclusive about any subject, and this is no exception. In such cases I've invited my listeners to consider the topics I couldn’t cover for lack of time. Here, I'd like to encourage you to make your own list of examples that depict the advantage of trading immediate for deferred gratification. Your examples will be far superior to mine, as they will be more personal to your life. 

Before closing, I want us to return to the pump shack. 

When Jack shared the story about priming the pump, he addressed it to a specific audience for a particular purpose. (The book’s title gives a hint as to that purpose!) But I, too, am writing to a specific audience for a particular purpose: that of considering who must tread the same path you have. 

If you have experienced any kind of abuse, you may breathe a sigh of relief when the beating ends. But unless you take action to put an end to the abuse, the long-range consequence is that the abuser returns. Or the abuser, enabled and empowered by not being held accountable, abuses others with greater relish and increasing success. This can be a misbehaving spouse, a misbehaving police officer, a misbehaving judge, a misbehaving TSA searcher, or a person lurking in the park to assault an unsuspecting jogger. 

If you’ve ever been on the receiving end of abuse, pressing for accountability has the potential for far-reaching benefits to those who come down the same road you’ve traveled. So after you’ve primed the pump and taken care of your thirst, please pull the pump handle one last time and refill that can before you leave. 

Grace and Peace, 

Charles+

Anglican Priest, Charles Moncrief, serves up the issues of the day on a platter mixed with scripture, seriousness, and a sense of humor to create a ministry founded in love for his fellow man.

“I’m an Anglican Priest, disguised as a geek during the week. It’s REALLY tough to change my costume, since phone booths are getting hard to find!”

Truly Caring for the Kids

by Charles Moncrief

Train children in the right way, and when old, they will not stray.  Proverbs 22:6 (KJV)

Whenever a political hack wants to gain power and build favor with constituents, especially following a traumatic national event, speechmakers appear on television and in news photos with children surrounding them. Why? Because it works. It’s a cheap and dirty form of child trafficking, one of the worst. Anytime a point cannot be made on its own merits, a favorite tactic is to drag the kids into the fray.

Some precedents from recent history include Chairman Mao of Red China, Kim Jong Il of communist North Korea, Chancellor Adolf Hitler of Nazi Germany, and Fidel Castro of communist Cuba. I admit that my ideals are different from those on this list, but I'd be just as disgusted to see some preacher surrounding himself with children as he pleads “Please bring your children to Sunday school, so that they don’t go to hell.” The believed merits of a cause simply do not justify this form of presentation.

While I'm writing this within a few weeks following the Connecticut school shooting, I'd rather leave the debates about gun control to those who follow those tactics. Instead of walking on those hot coals, my purpose is to focus on a much better treatment of children than launching a modern-day cheap version of the Children’s Crusade in the thirteenth century.*

Rather than dwell on child trafficking and abuse at the political and media level, we might want to look at forms of abuse that can occur at the level where we have some control and influence: the home. Admittedly, observations and reflections are intuitive; I'm no expert on raising children, and I'm suspicious of anyone who claims to be. But here are some observations and considerations.

Trauma or violence.Well-balanced children tend to come from peaceful homes, where there is respect and acceptance even for differences. And the opposite is true; unbalanced children generally come from traumatic home life where disrespect abounds. Violence in the home, whether physical or verbal, has its effect even on the children who are not the direct targets of the violence.

Parental example. Parents can have far-reaching effects on the children simply by the example they set. There’s no such thing as “when the children aren’t looking”. Children may be young, but they’re not incapable of picking up clues that build a picture for them over time. While nobody’s suggesting a return to the Ozzie and Harriet days, it makes sense to consider the effects of the behavioral examples parents set for their children.

Parental absence. How familiar is the story of a father whose success in business or society became more important than his family? Often a father or mother becomes so obsessed with providing for the children, at the expense of the relationship with those children. I get the picture of a parent driving by the house and throwing a bag of cash, food, or clothing into the front yard for the children to pick up.

Parental discipline. Failure to have realistic expectations on children’s formation can breed an atmosphere of disrespect and resentment. Remembering that children are not simply adults in small packages, it’s important to set standards of behavior and to enforce them. A child who knows his or her boundaries is actually much more free than one who doesn’t. Bruno Bettelheim offered an illustration of a child playing in a fenced-in yard, who knew the boundaries. He compared the situation to that of a child in an unfenced yard, who developed a fear of straying because there were no boundaries to serve as a guide.

Parental favoritism. Even the children who “benefit” from favoritism tend to have little respect for their parents, maybe more so than those who get the less favored treatment. The failure to provide even-handed discipline can have lifelong consequences when the children turn into adults.

In principle, the responses to these might be too simplistic:

• Provide a peaceful and nurturing environment for the children.
• Set examples of maturity in front of the children, even when you think they aren’t looking.
• Be present with the kids. They’d rather have your presence than your presents.
• Set standards of discipline and behavior, with consistent enforcement.
• Don’t play favorites.

I don’t like the simplistic responses, so I'll leave that to those truly skilled in the art of raising children into adults. But I would like to offer a few thoughts for the wounded veterans of relationships, since most of us live in some form of that state.

Repairing broken relationships. Consider the possibility that it is never too late to mend fences. Whether with alienated children or broken relationships with former close friends. If you can build up the strength to try (or to try YET AGAIN), this might be the time when you find gold. At least, you might find yourself liking the person you see in the mirror.

Reaching out. If you think you’re meeting a person halfway, think again. If you think you’re reaching out more than halfway, think again. Better yet, get an objective opinion from someone you trust.

Being open to honest feedback. Rather than considering the source, try considering the content. One scene comes to mind from “Last Holiday” in which a corporate president says (paraphrased) “She made a lot of accusations and we took it, because we thought she was someone important.” Sometimes the least of those around us can offer the greatest value if we will but pay attention. Remember, “The emperor has no clothes!” came from the mouth of a child.

Forgiveness kept in private. Before entering the presence of the person you’re reaching out to, silently and to yourself say the person’s name followed by “I forgive you”. Then never say it to the person’s face, at least as a lead-off line. At least, make the approach from a posture that the issue is too complicated to offer blame.

Even an attempt to repair a broken relationship can have far-reaching benefits. The grown children may not be receptive, even to the first hundred attempts, but they will on some level have to acknowledge that you’ve made the effort.

Wouldn’t it be nice if life worked this way all the time? We can all hope and pray for a perfect world, though we can at the same time hope and pray for the strength -- and even the sense of humor -- to deal with the reality that the system has its flaws. All the best in your journey through this new year.

Grace and Peace,
Charles+


* Legend, tradition, and lore have muddied the water about the events and sentiments surrounding the Children’s Crusade. Many modern historians even claim the participants were impoverished adults. Regardless, I'm using the name for what the words imply: exploitation of children to sell an idea that cannot stand on its own merits.

Restoration

by Charles Moncrief

And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten.

Joel 2:25 (KJV) 

The farmer in the Ancient Near East understood what was at stake every year at planting time. Whenever the harvest was lost to disease, weather, or pests, for the farmer the year was lost. And it was lost forever. There was no going back for a do-over. There was no making up for those losses in the next year. There was grieving for a loss that can never be regained, never recovered, never restored.

We know something of that mindset. In sports the quarterback wishes he hadn’t thrown the interception that killed the game-winning drive in the final minute. The coach tells the team some variation of “Put that loss behind you, we have to get ready for next week’s game”, but the players still have their period of grief.

In a marketing campaign the advertising executive wishes she’d given her mock-up to a colorblind man to review the packaging, rather than lose millions of dollars on a message that a sizable portion of the demographics can’t see.

At one time or another we’ve all wished we could take back or do over something that we really botched: that job interview, that gaff in the public speech, that letter to the editor. Actually, in less than a minute I’m able to think of several do-overs I’d like to have!

It’s fun -- unless you’re the quarterback or the ad executive -- to reminisce about those lost moments. But it quickly gets serious and ugly when the words and actions inflict harm. The losses become monumental when in the heat of the moment a spouse degrades a partner to whom was made a pledge of “for better for worse”. [In our marriage rite it’s not “for better or for worse” and not even “for better, for worse”; it’s ironclad.] How big is the loss? The well-known lament “I gave you the best years of my life” should provide a clue about the magnitude. The years lost to the devouring locust may suddenly echo in our hearts. It’s not only lost things; it’s lost years. And the only effective way of dealing with it is to move forward.

Putting the past behind us is never easy.

Recovering what we’ve lost in the past is even harder; and the more we try, the more it robs us of present joy. The more we obsess with vengeance, even in its mildest forms of guarding against future hurts, the more it robs us of our effectiveness at moving forward with our lives.

Returning to the agricultural imagery of the Ancient Near East, the farmer knows that lost years can never be restored. “Restore the years”? That’s impossible!

Here’s where I see amazing power in the prophecy of Joel, for the ancient farmer and for us today.

GOD SPECIALIZES IN THE IMPOSSIBLE.

Lost years are restored. Lost lives are rebuilt. Lost souls are regained.

With man, it is impossible; but with God all things are possible. 

Matthew 19:26 (KJV) 

Grace and Peace,

Charles+


Anglican Priest, Charles Moncrief, serves up the issues of the day on a platter mixed with scripture, seriousness, and a sense of humor to create a ministry founded in love for his fellow man.


“I’m an Anglican Priest, disguised as a geek during the week. It’s REALLY tough to change my costume, since phone booths are getting hard to find!”

Reaping What We Sow

by Charles Moncrief

There is a way that seems right, but its end is the way of death. 

Proverbs 14:12 

Rodney King was found dead in his southern California swimming pool on June 17, 2012. You can essentially ignore the medical examiner’s report. No official government report will tell you that the true cause of his death was a pattern of self-destructive behavior that set in motion his inevitable end.

Those in my generation remember Rodney King as an African-American man who was beaten by several Los Angeles police officers during a traffic stop in 1991. An amateur video shows the officers hitting Mr. King with their batons as other officers stood by and watched. The acquittal of the officers by a jury in 1992 provided an excuse for riots in South Central Los Angeles, in which more than 50 people were killed and more than 2,000 were injured. The US District Court effectively re-tried the officers, sending two of them to prison and strong-arming the city of Los Angeles to pay off Rodney King with a $3.5 million civil-rights settlement. Mr. King didn’t keep the settlement very long, and he was unsuccessful at obtaining more from his later arrests for continued drug use and other crimes. Among these arrests were for driving under the influence of PCP when he crashed into a power pole in 2005, and for suspicion of domestic violence. In 2007 police found Mr. King drunk and wounded from gunshot wounds believed to be associated with domestic violence. In all of the arrests the police conduct was reported as EXEMPLARY. No King was harmed in the making of future arrest movies.

The amateur video, which made for excellent propaganda in such places as Moscow and Bagdad, showed the power of editing by major news media. The video didn’t include the high-speed chase, including the number of pursuing units, nor did it show the lives that Mr. King endangered when he drove at freeway speeds through residential streets to evade capture. No propagandists aired Mr. King’s statement that he was fleeing police because he feared the impact a DWI arrest would have on his parole from a previous robbery conviction.

While it appears I'm beating up on Rodney King myself, I can’t argue. Hopefully, I'll mitigate the hammering in my conclusion. Either that, or I'll give additional causes of offense and dilute this a bit. First, however, I want to be perfectly clear about some things.

He DID NOT deserve the beating by officers.
He DID NOT deserve the physical destruction of his life by illegal drug use and other crimes.
He DID NOT deserve the gunshot wounds he sustained on at least one occasion.

While he upped the odds of these things happening, he did not deserve them.

For the mentoring effect he had on the younger generation, showing them examples of how they can clean up financially through a life of crime and civil-rights incidents, it seems that he could have made this speech:

“I've upped my odds. Now up yours.”

I've spent too much time on the Rodney King incident, so now I'm reducing to one-liners the things I wanted to address more fully. Here goes.

Several athletes from Duke University upped their odds of rape charges when they repeatedly hung out in exotic bars and formed relationships with the female employees. For three in 2006, the probability became a certainty.

A person escaping a relationship of domestic violence ups her odds of serious injury when she returns to the home in response to pleas from her husband and the family minister.

A man ups the odds of coronary artery disease when he lives a sedentary lifestyle and consumes inappropriate foods. (Sorry, I can’t get more specific than that. A juicy steak may hurt some, while broom straws and other fibers may hurt others. But you get the idea.)

Fair is fair. I can’t close without returning to make a final comment about Rodney King.

I was disgusted when I learned that he blew through the $3.5 million, disappointed that he didn’t use even a part of the money for drug rehabilitation. Mea culpa. Mr. King may not have used the settlement money to fund any rehabilitation, but he DID make the effort to rebuild his life. He did attend rehabilitation, and he did take to the lecture circuit making speeches about the destructive effects of drug abuse. Even after turning cynic and taking cynical points off Mr. King’s appearance on Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew and Sober House, the good that Mr. King did in the last few years must not be allowed to die with him. Even in the dirtiest places, a flower can grow.

Grace and Peace,

Charles+

Anglican Priest, Charles Moncrief, serves up the issues of the day on a platter mixed with scripture, seriousness, and a sense of humor to create a ministry founded in love for his fellow man.

“I’m an Anglican Priest, disguised as a geek during the week. It’s REALLY tough to change my costume, since phone booths are getting hard to find!”
 

An Excuse for Nothing, Motivation for Everything

 

 Never use my death as an excuse for anything, but motivation for everything.

Stefanie Spielman (1967-2009)

by  Charles Moncrief

Stefanie spoke these words to her family -- former Ohio State and NFL linebacker Chris Spielman, and their four children -- not long before she lost her battle with breast cancer. It may seem odd that I'd be writing about someone who died in November 2009. The reason the subject came up is that her husband’s book That’s Why I'm Here just came out. I'm not promoting Chris’ book, though I bought a copy and I'm scheming for ways to get Chris to sign it. (Keep in mind, Chris WAS a linebacker, so for me to back him into a corner will require finesse rather than strength!) I'll also get a second copy and push on him to autograph it as a raffle prize for the Dallas chapter of the Alumni Association. Proceeds benefit the scholarship fund.

 My wife is a survivor of breast cancer since 1998. We met Stefanie and Chris on one of their fundraising cruises in 2008, benefiting the James Cancer Center in Columbus. We were both impressed with their warmth as well as their endless energy. We were also deeply touched by Stefanie's compassion toward those going through this disease. At the survivor breakfast Stefanie talked for about 45 minutes and then opened the floor for comments. Several responded, all motivated to pay forward the encouragement they had received from Stefanie. Since we’re from Dallas, we could celebrate but not participate in this response. Nonetheless, we were inspired by Stefanie's words. And we were grieved by Stefanie’s closing comments, announcing that the cancer had come back. Something told my wife and me that Stefanie’s life would end soon, and our hearts sank the following year when the news came.  

Stefanie (left) and my wife Ruth 

 I could continue to tell stories of Stefanie’s heroics near the end of her life, and of Chris’ heroics before and since. But that would defeat my purpose. Everyone diagnosed with cancer starts out as a survivor, and everyone who has been through the affliction is a hero. That’s all I have to say on the subject.

 I want instead to address is the use of an adversity as an excuse, and the use of the adversity as motivation. The adversity may be a loved one’s pending or death, or the memory of a loss that has already occurred. The adversity may be a relationship about to end as a result of brokenness, or one that has already ended. The adversity may be our doctor’s pending diagnosis, or a diagnosis that we’re still trying to absorb.

 How we will respond to any adversity in our lives, whether as an excuse or as a motivation, is largely -- though not exclusively -- our choice to make. In more than one speech, Chris Spielman said he has much to do. Sometimes spoken, sometimes unspoken, Chris always acknowledges the absolutely essential part that those in his support base have played as he goes forward in his life. The value of those who walk alongside us in adversity is greater than gold.

Grace and Peace,
Charles+

 Let me add a postscript to this idea of walking alongside someone. I didn’t have to walk with my wife as she struggled through cancer and her life since then. Rather, I got to walk with her. It was one of the greatest privileges of my life.

Anglican Priest, Charles Moncrief, serves up the issues of the day on a platter mixed with scripture, seriousness, and a sense of humor to create a ministry founded in love for his fellow man.

“I’m an Anglican Priest, disguised as a geek during the week. It’s REALLY tough to change my costume, since phone booths are getting hard to find!” 

You’ve Come a Long Way, Babies

by Charles Moncrief

No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were; any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
“MEDITATION XVII” (Jon Donne, 1572-1631)

Following the recent shooting death of one large, muscular seventeen-year-old, activists have exploited the event to feed their own selfish ambitions.

These opportunists have made themselves both judge and prosecution in the court of public opinion, and they have lied through their teeth to convict their defendant with false evidence which they present to us, the jury. The deceased, a sizable and strong adversary in the altercation that led to his death, is presented by the prosecution as a sweet and gentle twelve-year-old. While none of the accusers are saying that the deceased was a pre-teen, this is the conclusion that the jury (you and I) are expected to draw. In the five years since this picture was taken, many other photos have also been generated which show the deceased in much less favorable settings and poses. The pictures showing unfavorable poses and settings have been reserved for use against the other party in this drama. With relish the prosecution shows a lopsided view of the two parties, counting on the jury (you and me) to draw the conclusions which have been predetermined.

It is unfortunate that in the court of public opinion the accuser is exempt from perjury. I'll not take issue here with the ends that these activists are seeking. Rather, I object to the methods and tactics they are using. In its raw form it is blatant child abuse.

Exploiting children, using them as pawns to play on emotions of the vulnerable, is not a new tactic.

· The politician who says “If you don’t vote for me (or for my bill), children will not get milk with their school lunches.”

· CBS News’ featuring of some worthwhile project that does wonderful things for children, with the obligatory comment that government funding cuts may diminish the benefit -- to the children, of course.

· News coverage of tragedies or natural disasters get more audience attention when the reporters can insert images of suffering children. (A dog reunited with its owner is not quite as effective, but it still plays a tune on the viewers’ heart strings.)

· When Texas campaigned for the state lottery, they presented verbal and visual images of schools and -- get this -- of children. The imagery was that lottery proceeds would go directly to school funding. Technically, since all fine print and presentations were accompanied by some sort of disclaimer that the receipts would go to the general fund (or some similar deception), Texas didn’t lie. But there were not enough thousand-word offsets to their pictures.

While it’s not bad in itself to support a cause by appealing to emotion, it’s a relatively new strategy to drag in the kids when the cause cannot stand on its own merits. And it’s incredibly effective, an adaptation of the truism “People don’t care how much you know, until they know how much you care.” And who doesn’t care about children?

Let me be clear. There is a difference between campaigning for children, and pimping children to advance your cause. Children’s advocacy groups are a thousand times more honest than those who abuse children by making posters out of them. This is indefensible, and it speaks to the new lows to which propagandists are sinking. Moreover, this child trafficking damages the uses of poster children for worthy causes. The Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, for example, is at risk when this cheap and dishonest tactic is used for political and social opportunism.

The movers and shakers who head these unconscionable misuses of children have yet to demonstrate that they even care about our younger humans. Many years ago in a conversation with a socialite, I was appalled to hear her say “My parents didn’t even want to see us in the morning until after they’d finished their second cup of coffee!” What added to my dismay was when I checked this out with another socialite, who fully agreed. To make matters worse, this is the course both of them were on if and when they married or had children. But this class of elitists will attend society balls, banquets, and fundraising events to get others to support their causes. And they’ll take plenty of hand-wipes to the sickening photo-ops so they can be seen “caring about” the little hellions.

Meanwhile, they’ll make sure the real child endangerments -- misuse of behavior-altering drugs, violent video games and movies, television programs that promote self-destructive lifestyles -- remain alive and even flourish. In her book White Ghetto Star Parker was quite explicit in the intentional mischaracterization of victim groups, including the trafficking of children for purposes that destroy the moral fabric of our society. She even named an ivy-league professor who suggested the killing of unviable infants any time during the first year of the little creatures’ lives! And it would seem that the administration of the university agrees with the professor, or lacks the spine to stand up to him.

Young or old, human life is precious. When a child dies, whether of a childhood disease or a gunshot wound in an altercation, that child’s death diminishes you and me. And when an adult dies of a disease or a gunshot wound in an altercation, that adult’s death diminishes you and me. But please do not allow our society to be further diminished by the blatant and unabashed lying about the facts of any of these tragedies. As a people we have enough to worry about, without sacrificing the truth on the altar of personal ambition.

Grace and Peace,
Charles+


Anglican Priest, Charles Moncrief, serves up the issues of the day on a platter mixed with scripture, seriousness, and a sense of humor to create a ministry founded in love for his fellow man.

“I’m an Anglican Priest, disguised as a geek during the week. It’s REALLY tough to change my costume, since phone booths are getting hard to find!” 

Related articles

• Even If It Does Quack. (timesupblog.blogspot.com)
• "It Died in Committee!" Re-Victimization of Crime Victims (donnagore.com)
• The Courage to Prosecute (seamusoriley.blogspot.com)

Even If It Does Quack.

by Charles Moncrief

. . . . . it still may not be a duck. If something I said can have two meanings, and one of them is bad, I meant it the other way. (from an email listing things a man wants to say to his wife) Let me start by pitching a couple of anecdotes to you. The first is a personal experience and the second is from a book by a colleague. The setting for the first is a church pew, on Sunday about ten minutes before the start of a church service. I'm one of three, sitting at the left end of the pew. In the center is the mother of the pre-school child sitting on her right. The little boy climbs over his mother, then over me, as he goes out to get a coloring book and other materials the church provides to occupy young children during the service. The child comes back in the way he left, climbing over me again and then climbing over his mother. 

In his book Dresser of Sycamore Trees, Garret Keizer relates his experience as second in line to check out at a grocery store. Ahead of him is a woman with numerous items, separated into little groups for which she pays individually. She takes a while to pay for her purchases, pulling out small bills from envelopes that seem to match one-for-one with the groups of items. The author must wait until the woman finishes all of her transactions before he can cash out and be on his way. 

Now comes the rest of the story in each case. We know the youngster could easily have gone out the other end of the pew, climbing over no one, but the fact is that he was probably unaware that there even was an “other end”. While he was in the pew, his eyes and his attention were fixed on his mother. It never occurred for him to look the other way. (Hmmm, maybe I should use this as a sermon illustration. But first, I might do well some time to preach such a sermon to myself first!) We could go all sorts of directions with this story, but I'd rather leave it as a gentle reminder that a mother-child bonding explained his behavior -- which for an adult might have seemed irrational or illogical. 

When Rev. Kizer left the store and went out to the parking lot after checking out, he saw the woman getting onto a bus with her many small packages. On the side of the bus was the name of a nearby senior center, and several residents were gratefully receiving the items she had so meticulously kept separate for each of them. 

In both cases, as in many others we encounter every day, it is easy to size up a situation quickly and draw conclusions based on our own life experience. The little fellow wasn’t being rude (in fact, his mother made him say “excuse me” after he’d climbed over me the second time and sat down), and the volunteer from the senior center wasn’t mathematically challenged. But a little more information may have been helpful to me as well as Rev. Kizer. More experience with children would have provided me the information, and seeing the bus outside may have helped my colleague. 

I remember a time from my college days when I became aware of the differences we have in our frames of reference, and what it’s like to be on the other side of such a difference. One of the other fellows in my dorm asked if he could borrow my metal cup to boil some water for soup. My gray hair should tell you that this was before we could cook in dorm rooms! I told him he was welcome to use the cup, and that it was in the top drawer with my T-shirts. When he brought it back later, thanking me, I told him “Glad to. Oh, did you wash it out?” He gave me one of those what-do-you-take-me-for looks and growled something like “Yeah, I washed it out!” Only then did I realize the error in my communication, as I shot back “I meant BEFORE you used it.” 

Do you think there’s room for more clarity on both sides of just about every conversation? Or is there room for more clarity in some of our actions? An insurance company was airing some terrific ads a few years ago, in which they showed scenes that at first glance could appear compromising but had a different reality when the camera pulled back and showed the context. Their tag line was something like “Don’t judge too quickly, we don’t.” 

It is true that the person might very well have a violin in the case he’s carrying into a bank lobby, although to leave the musical instrument in the trunk of his car would be a lot less hard on the nerves of the tellers and the security guard. 

Grace and Peace, 

Charles+

Anglican Priest, Charles Moncrief, serves up the issues of the day on a platter mixed with scripture, seriousness, and a sense of humor to create a ministry founded in love for his fellow man.

“I’m an Anglican Priest, disguised as a geek during the week. It’s REALLY tough to change my costume, since phone booths are getting hard to find!” 

When the Ski Slopes Became Heated:Can Friends be Abusive?

By Charles Moncrief

As 2012 opens with its vast opportunities to battle the potential and actual injustices of family relationships, I wanted to start out by sharing what in my opinion was a perfect example of abuse with which to end our most immediate trip around the sun. This story is as told to me by “Dr. Tom”, a co-worker at my weekday job. I'm telling this with Dr. Tom’s permission.

After job-hunting for more than two years, Tom joined our Internet Catalog Sales team about six months ago. He wasn’t a doctor then, but that changed soon after he started; following a fourteen-year delay, a prestigious New England school conferred his degree. The Department of Defense couldn’t understand what they were reading in his dissertation on particle physics, so they classified it Top Secret and blocked its publication. No PhD until either the DoD figured out what Tom wrote, or until their experts decided to declassify his material, whichever came first. After nearly a decade and a half, they declassified Tom’s topic. So now, since he calls me “Father Charles”, it’s only fitting that I should call him “Doctor Tom”.

And since the particles of interest to Dr. Tom are in outer space, I can truly say that now I work with a rocket scientist.

While this introduction alone could be a good story of abuse in itself, it’s not my topic here. Rather, the topic is Dr. Tom’s long weekend ski trip to Winter Park with his girlfriend Crys. Since Crys’ birthday was on New Year’s Eve, the two of them looked forward to a wonderful holiday vacation trip. As is often the case, the dream vacation had a rude awakening.

Plans started on an upbeat note when a friend who lives in Colorado called Dr. Tom and said that he and his wife were going to ring in the New Year in Paris. Would Dr. Tom and Crys be willing to house-sit for their friends in Winter Park, in exchange for free lodging near the ski slopes? Before consenting to the deal, Dr. Tom asked if Crys’ brother and sister-in-law could join them. The owner was willing, so the happy couple started making plans for a fun time at the slopes and a birthday (and New Year’s Eve) celebration at the top of the mountain.

Around mid-December Dr. Tom told us about the first glitch. Crys’ family couldn’t join them, but her co-worker just happened to be hanging loose and would be happy to join them. In return for the free lodging, Jean’s husband Brad would drive them up to Winter Park in his van. It’s an aggressive drive from Dallas to Winter Park, but achievable with an early enough morning departure and limited stops. So Brad and Jean were to pick them up in the dark of the morning.

On Thursday Brad and Jean pulled into Dr. Tom’s driveway at the expected time, but with an unexpected passenger manifest. Their two teenage boys were aboard, so would Dr. Tom and Crys mind having two more people share the living quarters? After all, the house sleeps eight. So the van took to the highway with six people aboard.

About two-thirds of the way to the ski area, Brad stopped to gas up his van. He gave Dr. Tom one of those looks (you know the look) that indicated he wasn’t expecting to pay for the gas. Well, fair is fair. After all, Brad was putting more than two thousand miles on the van, so why shouldn’t Dr. Tom kick in something to fill up the thing? Dr. Tom paid for the gas. And for food at the gas station’s convenience store while they were there.

Now I'm a little fuzzy on the details here, but somehow from out of nowhere two more members of Jean’s family showed up to join this group. Of course, since the house sleeps eight, this was workable. Who would let a mild irritation get in the way of a dream vacation?

When they arrived in Winter Park, the eight of them were tired. But not too tired for Brad, Jean, and the boys to stake out their claim to all the bedrooms. No problem, since Dr. Tom has slept on couches in living rooms many times in his life. Crys, however, didn’t like couches, so she put some blankets and sheets on the living room floor.

But sleep was not to come just yet. Brad, Jean, the boys, and the other family members were hungry. So as they rang up their groceries at the nearby store, Brad conveniently had left his credit card at the house. Of course, Dr. Tom was the gentleman! As a result, plenty of food was had by all.

Back at the house, two more people showed up. One of Jean’s cousins had flown in from Toronto and brought her teenage daughter. With judicious rearrangement of the quarters, the eight guests had their accommodations while Dr. Tom and Crys remained on the living room couch and floor.

The next morning, rested from the long drive (well, some of them were) and full of breakfast, they all went to the ski area. Tom rented his and Crys’ equipment, and proceeded to start a day of skiing. But wait! There’s more! Wasn’t Dr. Tom going to pay the rental for the other eight folks? Oh, an oversight which Dr. Tom’s credit card quickly corrected. Then came the lift tickets. $90 for the teens’ day passes, plus lift tickets for the adults in Brad’s and Jean’s family. But there’s still more, as Brad and Jean wanted season passes because they were planning to go back later in the winter for more skiing.

With everyone fed, equipped, and lifted, the day progressed. Dr. Tom and Crys shook off their guests’ arrogance and attacked the slopes with a vengeance until early afternoon when they broke for lunch. Strangely, all ten of them were ready for food at the same time, so Dr. Tom lived up to all their expectations. As they were walking outside to put their skis on, they noticed that the teenagers were no longer wearing ski boots. The kids said that they were through skiing for the day, after using their lift tickets only once. (At this point I'm amazed that there was no call to the ski patrol, to perform first aid on those teens! Or on their parents for allowing this abuse.) But Dr. Tom and Crys cooled down as they enjoyed the afternoon of skiing on Winter Park’s better slopes.

The evening was no better. Food and drinks for everyone in the house, even though the number had increased to eleven! When Dr. Tom saw the eleventh person, he asked “Who are you?” Number Eleven identified himself as the boyfriend of that Canadian woman who had joined the party with her daughter. Some more rearranging, and everyone had a place to sleep. (Dr. Tom and Crys, of course, were still on and beside the couch in the living room.)

Being a morning person, Dr. Tom was ready for vengeance. At sunrise the next morning he roused Brad out of bed and said he and Crys wanted a ride to the slopes. It was New Year’s Eve and it was Crys’ birthday, so they wanted to get as much skiing in as possible before coming back to the house and cleaning up for the party on the mountaintop. And since Brad’s truck was the only source of transportation, it was time for him to get up and do some driving! It didn’t work. Dr. Tom and Crys had to take a shuttle or a taxi to the slopes, and Brad’s bunch would meet them there later.

At noon, when Dr. Tom and Crys were at the top of the mountain, they received a call from Brad. It was time to come down to meet them at the lodge, because the kids needed lift tickets. And besides, it was lunchtime and they were hungry. Dr. Tom suggested that there are other ways for a person to get to the top of the mountain, and he suggested the alternative of hiking with the skis strapped to their backs. Of course, Brad and Jean had their season passes, so they were quite content to pass the advice along to the others in the party.

By the end of the day, Dr. Tom and Crys were too exhausted to party. As they were contemplating a quieter way to celebrate, including the alternative of renting a room somewhere else, Crys was almost asleep when Brad showed up and asked if they had $500. FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS! What in the world for? Brad and Jean had made nine reservations for the mountaintop, and they needed $55 apiece to pay for the tickets. Crys said to Dr. Tom, “Go to the nearest ATM, get the cash, and give it to them!” Not quite understanding why his girlfriend would say such a thing, Dr. Tom obeyed orders. It soon became obvious, even to a rocket scientist, why Crys had given the order. That evening the two of them were alone in the house. Crys said, “If it had been a THOUSAND dollars, I would have sent you to get it! All I wanted was to get them out of the house!” (We’ll leave the rest of the evening, with the clean sheets and blankets, to your imagination.)

New Year’s Day, Sunday, was another surprise. The Canadian woman asked if Dr. Tom would donate a few hundred to her church in Toronto. In cash, of course. When Dr. Tom refused, she took her daughter and returned to Canada. Her boyfriend mentioned that she didn’t feel appreciated, so she left. It seemed that things were starting to come unglued, so she didn’t want to be in a hostile environment. Besides, the rest of them would be leaving later in the day.

On the trip back Brad looked at his gas gauge and decided to fill up. Dr. Tom also looked at the gas gauge, it was two-thirds full. But Dr. Tom fulfilled his obligation to those people by paying for the final fill-up. And on Tuesday, when Dr. Tom came back to work, we were treated to one of the most amazing stories about how cheeky some people can get.

I hope you enjoyed this story. I wrote it from memory, and I've attempted to be accurate in describing this experience as it was shared. Both Crys and Dr. Tom are resilient, and they’re already finding humor in the events. In fact, they’ve consulted their Thesaurus for synonyms to the word “moocher” and are getting a lot of pleasure reflecting on the subtle differences that the Thesaurus provides.

Not everyone is as resilient as Dr. Tom and Crys. I'm not. And it would have taken me several months to find humor in all that went on. But maybe, as we get all full of stiffness during the year when we don’t like the abusive treatment that others dish out, maybe we can have a resource here. Maybe we can read a few of the atrocities that Dr. Tom and Crys went through. We can sigh and tell ourselves that the world has all kinds of people in it, and we can also determine that we won’t let such people ruin the gifts that we get every day.

Grace and Peace,

Charles+

Anglican Priest, Charles Moncrief, serves up the issues of the day on a platter mixed with scripture, seriousness, and a sense of humor to create a ministry founded in love for his fellow man.

“I’m an Anglican Priest, disguised as a geek during the week. It’s REALLY tough to change my costume, since phone booths are getting hard to find!”