TO SERVE, NOT TO SPEAK

It’s a scam that goes back to the beginning of religion. If you claim to speak for God…then you can’t be wrong, because if you challenge one who claims to speak for God, then you’ve challenged God. Except, of course, no one…NO ONE can speak for God. Now, I’m not disputing the existence of God. In fact, I’m a believer myself. I think, in my life God has spoken to me. But, never by someone who had actually claimed to be speaking for God.

The most memorable time I believe God spoke to me was when one of my daughters, without prompting, advised me that she always gave money to street people who asked for money. Her belief was that anyone who had to ask her for a dollar needed the money more than she did. For me, God could not have been clearer and my attitude has been different about giving money to persons who ask me for money on the street ever since. That’s the way God has always spoken to me…and, I’ll bet that’s the way God normally speaks to you too.

However, the ruse that the “executives of the clergy” use, whether they be our neighborhood church pastors, or preachers who have infected the airwaves, is they tell you they speak for God. That way…you have no standing to question their edict. Very convenient, don’t you think? Not all pastors are this way. Some actually devote themselves to the purpose religious teachings espouse…SERVING. That’s what Christians, Muslim’s, Hindu’s are supposed to do. Serving mankind is our admonition. It can’t be said any clearer than the admonition from the Bible…”do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

I have not read Sarah Palin’s book…nor, do I intend to. However, Frank Rich (who has read all of Sarah’s book) in his Op-Ed article of Sunday, November 22, 2009 in the New York Times mentioned a two page portion of the book were Sarah signed a letter from God in her book as though it was God who wrote and sent the letter. Mr. Rich states, “The book’s most frequently dropped names, predictably enough, are the Lord and Ronald Reagan (though not necessarily in that order). Easily the most startling passage in “Going Rogue,” running more than two pages, collates extended excerpts from a prayerful letter Palin wrote to mark the birth of Trig, her child with Down syndrome. This missive’s understandable goal was to reassert Palin’s faith and trust in God. But Palin did not write her letter to God; she wrote the letter from God, assuming His role and voice herself and signing it “Trig’s Creator, Your Heavenly Father.” If I may say so — Oy!” Rather bold don’t you think.

Sister Sarah’s latest foreign policy position (something she’s never had before) comes via her biblical interpretation of the book of Revelations. She believes the Jews should continue settling in the Gaza since, as she states, “in the days and years ahead the Jews will be returning to this land.” You’ll need to read up on Revelations to see exactly where her divine foreign policy emanates from, but let me give you what I remember God revealing in the Book of Revelations… “no man knows the time!” The earth is estimated by scientist to be approximately 4.5 BILLION years old but Sister Sarah and her spiritual guide Billy Graham know we are in the “end of times.” Yes…as much as it hurts me to say this, because I grew up admiring Billy Graham. However, Billy and his son Franklin also engage in this deception. They submit themselves to us as “SPEAKING” for God.

Evangelical and Catholic…churches of all denominations use this technique (that they SPEAK for God). Say you speak for God…and then no one can dispute your position. I grew up in Southern Baptist churches where most, not all…but, most, of the ministers tried to use this ruse. Catholics use it with gusto. Even to the point they think they should determine whether a parishioner can take communion or not! This is outrageous. We are either all children of God…or none of us is a child of God.
Our purpose is to SERVE God…not to SPEAK for God. To speak for God in my way of thinking takes issue with the third commandment to “take the name of God in vain.” I’m not proposing to be a member of this elite, arrogant, evangelical group…but, let me let you in on a little secret. I know who speaks for God. GOD SPEAKS FOR GOD!
Finally let me conclude with the case of Bishop Thomas Tobin, Bishop of Providence, Rhode Island, who proposes to enforce the will of the Catholic Church on members of Congress who are Catholic. The Bishop stated on November 23, 2009 (Hardball with Chris Matthews) “…the point is that any Catholic in public office, his first commitment has to be to his faith, not just for a Catholic, but for a member of any religious community. No commitment is more important than your commitment to your faith, because it involves your relationship with God.”

I remember how in the 1960 election, we Southern Baptist, we’re worried that John F. Kennedy would allow the Pope to govern the country through President Kennedy, a Roman Catholic. To dispel this concern President Kennedy said the following, “I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant, nor Jewish, where no public official either requests or accept instructions on public policy from the pope, the National Council of Churches, or any other ecclesiastical source, where no religious body seeks to impose its will, directly or indirectly, upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials.”

Chris Matthews had one of the best exchanges I have ever witnessed with the fine Bishop. Chris stated, “…what we’re talking about here is the law, not the morality of the issue, but the law.”

This is exactly the point. Adultery is adverse to the teachings of the Christian Church, yet we’re not proposing nor imposing criminal penalties for adultery are we…Senator Vetter, or Senator Ensign? The Roman Catholic Church through Bishop Tobin is telling Catholic members of Congress how to vote.

Chris went on to challenge the Bishop regarding what the criminal penalties for abortion should be. Chris said this…“You said that we should go back to where we were before Roe v. Wade in '73. So let's go back to that, if that is the prescription you're offering here. If you outlaw abortion at the state level, say at the Rhode Island level, or the Pittsburgh level in Pennsylvania, where you come from, or anything like that, then you make it illegal for a person to go get on abortion. So what does that do, in fact? What's the effect on human life? You want to respect and preserve human life. What is the effect that has if you say a doctor can't perform an abortion? Would you criminalize it? Would you put people in jail? If it's murder, as you see it, would you criminalize it? And the Bishops reply…“I wouldn’t even pretend to be in a position to do that.” Read that again…”I wouldn’t even pretend to be in a position to do that.” Well then, what the hell is the Bishop doing telling a member of Congress, elected by much more than the Roman Catholic Church and it’s members, regarding his vote on anything.

Chris Matthews (a Roman Catholic himself) had some very poignant comments to make to the Bishop…and all of us in my opinion.

Chris said, “I think you're intervening. I think you're getting into law here, and you don't like Congressman Kennedy's voting record in Congress.” And if there is a hesitancy to punish a woman for having an abortion, maybe that's instructive to you because when you realize you don't really want to punish a woman for having an abortion, under the law, then maybe you should step back from using the law as your tool in enforcing moral authority. Maybe your moral authority comes from the pulpit and from teaching, and a congressman has a totally different role, which is to write the law. When it comes to the law, it's a secular question. It has not to do with the moral - we do a lot of things in this country we don't like, we think are immoral. But the question is what sanction do you apply to it? What should be the penalty for a young woman or a girl, even, to have an abortion? You have no idea, and it's not your area. And yet this is the very area you've transgressed in. You've gone into the area of lawmaking, and condemned the behavior of public officials who have to write public policy. The difference between rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, which is the law, and rendering to your flock and people like me what is right and wrong.”

“Your problem is you haven't gotten people to obey your moral code through teaching, and you have resorted now to use the law to do your enforcement for you. And the problem with that is you are hesitant to state for me now what the punishment should be under the law for having an abortion, because you know, deep down, if you said one minute in prison, you would be laughed at, because the American people, catholic and non-catholic, do not think it's a criminal act to have an abortion.”

“They may not like it. They may think it's immoral. But they don't think it's criminal. And yet you are here bringing the force of the law, the authority of the police, and the bench, the law, the judiciary. You want to bring it all to bear, including the Constitution, to enforce your moral beliefs.”

Powerful words from a Roman Catholic lay person (Chris Matthews) to a Roman Catholic Bishop. I doubt even Chris Matthews realizes the Bishop does not SPEAK for GOD…the Bishop is supposed to SERVE God. And, there’s a big difference.