Running

I live as the Sun rises,

no big chances, no surprises.

When darkness falls I close my eyelids;

It's then that my dream calls.

I dream not just of the demons;
they no doubt lurk within;

But ruminate on sunny skies,

a place where light begins.

I recall my past with joy, but then

my future comes to play;

as a spectre overtaking

all brightness from the day.

But it always ends when I awake,

and this I swear, is true.

As I run in fear from darkness

I always run to you....

"Youth Beware...." by Seidu Malik, PhD. - Manipulation? You Decide.

This article by Seidu Malik appeared in this Sunday’s Charlotte Observer on the Op-Ed page. The man who wrote it is a PhD. Is this article misleading? You decide. I have followed it with a definition of caliphate and also the links to the complete quotations from the Quran used in the article so that you may refer to them. 

“Youth Beware……”

By Seidu Malik -

Charlotte Observer Sunday May 2, 2015

The rate at which some vulnerable youth are becoming brain-washed into believing ISIS propaganda calls for a serious dialogue on the issue. Any youth contemplating joining ISIS should bear in mind that the barbaric killings of Christians, destruction of ancient artifacts and murder of innocent people in the region under the control of ISIS have absolutely no affiliation to the ethics and tenets of Islam. There should be no compulsion in religion (Quran 2:257) and the prophet Muhammad never forced anyone to accept him. It is therefore very strange that despite all these atrocities, some youth still fall victim to this diabolical organization which has become adept at spreading misinformation and taking advantage of ignorance.

It is important for youth to understand that ISIS is flourishing in unstable countries in the Middle East, such as Syria, Iraq and Libya, due to breakdown of law and order. When there is a power vacuum in a country as a result of war, any splinter group can emerge to fill the void left behind. Such is certainly the case here. ISIS’s barbaric actions contradict the Quran and the traditions of the prophet Muhammad. Hence, the ISIS organization should be viewed as a political unit struggling for power in the affected countries.

Quran requires tolerance

Islam as a religion shows great tolerance to people of other religious faiths and, in fact, it is incumbent upon Muslims to protect the lives and property of those of other faiths (Quran 22:41). Even idol worshippers, which the Quran categorically reject as false (Quran 6:109) are not to be abused or insulted. But what does the world see ISIS doing today? Brutal killings of Christians, journalists, foreign aid workers, raping and enslaving of women and children just to mention a few.

Are these actions not against the prophet Muhammad’s own words when he sought to protect the Christian monastery at Mount Sinai, Egypt?: “No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.” Did the prophet not give his mosque for a delegation of Christians to hold their church service? Did he not send some of his companions to seek asylum in the Christian kingdom of Abyssinia? Since the answer is yes, why should ISIS murder Christians in Libya and other areas under their control?

It is apparent that ISIS is distorting true Islamic teachings to suit its political ideology and therefore the youth should not buy into its sophisticated propaganda. If the purpose of joining ISIS is for spiritual development from their so-called “caliphate,” it is bound to fail because the true caliphate of Islam as clearly exhibited by the companions of the prophet Muhammad for more than a century and recently by the Ahmadiyya Community have never resorted to violence to spread the true message of Islam.

A better way

You cannot win people’s hearts and minds by terror and neither can you force someone to believe in your faith. ISIS is a political organization doomed to fail and it will certainly be a mistake on the part of some youth to join such an organization. ISIS’s current despicable actions are against the genuine teachings of the Quran and therefore have no hope of uplifting the spiritual progress of anyone. Not all that glitters is gold and therefore do not be fooled through propaganda or savvy Internet videos into thinking that ISIS represents the true Islam.

If some youth are in the quest for leadership or spiritual uplift, there is an alternative peace-loving caliphate found only in the Ahmadiyya Muslim community with a well-structured organization, huge literature base and clear leadership qualities to help any seeker of truth satisfy his or her spiritual thirst. By this, it is hoped that those youth in search of spiritual enlightenment will abandon the suicidal mission of travelling overseas to join ISIS but will instead turn to the peace-loving caliphate in the comfort of their own homes in America to really understand the true meaning and value of Islam which categorically rejects the killing of innocent souls (Quran 5:33).*

Seidu Malik, Ph.D, is the education youth leader for the RTP Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. He lives in Chapel Hill.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article20035407.html

Let's just start with that last paragraph and the reference to 5:33;

* 5:33 Sahih International - Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.

Caliphate - the era of Islam's ascendancy from the death of Mohammed until the 13th century; some Moslems still maintain that the Moslem world must always have a calif as head of the community; "their goal was to reestablish the Caliphate"

 2. caliphate - the territorial jurisdiction of a caliph

↔jurisdiction - in law; the territory within which power can be exercised

 3. caliphate - the office of a caliph

Note by me:

The 1^st caliphate was after Muhammad died in 632. The last ended in 1924 when Ataturk- the father of Modern secular Turkey - abolished the Caliphate for all time. The Caliphate is to extend the Islamic faith as far and as wide as possible; with world wide submission the object. Qur'an (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."

http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=22&verse=39&to=48

(22:41) (Allah will certainly help) those84 who, were We to bestow authority on them in the land, will establish Prayers, render Zakah, enjoin good, and forbid evil.85 The end of all matters rests with Allah.86

84. Those who help Allah are the people who invite mankind to Tauhid and exert their utmost to establish the true faith and righteousness.

85 “If We give them authority”: In this one sentence, the real aim of the Islamic State and the characteristics of those who conduct its affairs have been stated concisely but comprehensively. Those who help Allah and deserve His succor behave righteously, establish Salat, make arrangements for the collection of Zakat and use their power and authority to propagate good and eradicate evil. (Non-believers.)

86. That is, it is Allah Who decides whom to give power in the land and when. This is meant to remove the misunderstanding of the proud and arrogant people who think that the destiny of the land and its dwellers is in their hands, and there is none to depose them from power. But Allah dethrones the most haughty ruler in supernatural ways and gives power to the most humble in order to show that He is All-Powerful, All-Mighty.

http://www.alislam.org/q/2-257.html

[2:257] There should be no compulsion in religion. Surely, right has become distinct from wrong; so whosoever refuses to be led by those who transgress, and believes in Allah, has surely grasped a strong handle which knows no breaking. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.

6:109  And they swear by Allah their strongest oaths that if a sign came to them, they would surely believe in it. Say, "The signs are only with Allah ." And what will make you perceive that even if a sign came, they would not believe, is followed by 110 which states;"And We will turn away their hearts and their eyes just as they refused to believe in it the first time. And We will leave them in their transgression, wandering blindly." This is followed by 111 which goes a bit further; "And even if We had sent down to them the angels [with the message] and the dead spoke to them [of it] and We gathered together every [created] thing in front of them, they would not believe unless Allah should will. But most of them, [of that], are ignorant." 

And of course, 5:33 again, simply because it is so revealing;

Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.

"Johnny Belinda" with Jane Wyman and Lew Ayres (1948)

I hadn’t seen this film in over 30 years; until I watched it again last night. It still retains the ability to unsettle the viewer. Jane Wyman; who plays the role of Belinda; won the Academy Award for Best Actress for her portrayal of a young woman whose mother died during her birth and was also left “deaf and dumb”; which was the term at the time for being born with the inability to speak or hear.

The film was originally a Broadway play of the same name in 1940 by Elmer Blaney Harris. It was rewritten; though not too much; for the screen by Allen Vincent and Irma von CubeIn addition to the Ocsar for Best Actress Award in the film version for Ms. Wyman, this film garnered 11 other Academy nominations; including Best Actor and Actress Awards for all 3 of the co-stars, as well as one for the Director Jean Negulesco.

The film was a groundbreaking one; one of the first to call attention to not only rape, but to people born with disabilities and the misunderstanding of those afflictions. Prior to this film these subjects had been off limits to film makers since the 1930’s and the advent of the Motion Picture Production Code, started by the industry to police itself in the wake of the Fatty Arbuckle scandal.

The film stars Jane Wyman as Belinda McDonald; Charles Bickford as her father, Black MacDonald, and Agnes Moorehead   as his sister, Aggie MacDonald. Lew Ayres plays Dr. Robert Richardson, a kindly physician who has had some heartbreak in his life and comes to a small fishing village on Cape Breton Island off the east coast of Canada to reassess his own life.

There he meets Black McDonald when he is summoned to the farm to help with the birth of a calf. While there he meets Belinda and sees that she is deaf and unable to speak. He approached her father about trying to teach her but the old man can’t really see any purpose to it. But he does get the old man’s permission to use the pond on the farm to fish as payment for delivering the calf. This brings him into further contact with Belinda; whom everyone calls “The Dummy.” He is determined to change that. Introducing Belinda to sign language she is able to learn how to lip read. Her father is so astonished that he agrees to let the Doctor continue with his efforts.

The doctor has an assistant in his office, Stella, who is in love with the doctor, who is not interested in anything but being a doctor. She is engaged to the town’s braggart, Locky McCormick; played by Stephen McNally. When he sees the doctor teaching Belinda to dance he is aroused by her beauty; which he has never noticed before. When the dance is over he sneaks back and rapes her. She tells no one of the attack.

As her condition becomes obvious the townsfolk begin to talk. When Belinda gives birth to a healthy boy she names Johnny, the town begins to act on their suspicions and shun the doctor, who they believe to be the father. The Doctor realizes the shame which will forever surround the girl and her child and so he offers to marry her. Her father, thinking the offer is made out of pity, declines to let him.

Locky goes to the farm to make a purchase of some grain and Blacky hears him talking to the baby and admitting that he is the father. The old man follows Locky off the farm with the intent of conflict and is killed by the other man to hide the secret.

Shortly after the murder of Blacky; as the 2 women struggle to keep the farm solvent; the local Morals Committee decides that Belinda and Aggie are not fit to care for the child without Blacky around. Further, they decide that the baby must be taken from Belinda, and then she is to be driven from the town she has shamed. Stella and Locky; who have by this time married; offer to adopt the baby and the Committee agree s to this.

It is while attempting to take the baby away from Belinda that Stella realizes the immorality of separating a mother from her child. When she tells Locky of her change of heart he admits to her that the child is his. She is horrified but remains silent. When Locky goes back inside to take the baby Belinda is waiting with a shotgun and kills him.

The ensuing trial pits the morality of the town against the reality of the actions of Locky. When he attacked and raped Belinda he relinquished the bonds which bound him to civilized society. The jury finds Belinda innocent and she is given back her child.

One of the more interesting things about the film is that is based on an actual case which took place by the author’s summer home in Fortune Bridge, Prince Edward Island. The real life Belinda was a woman named life Lydia Dingwell of Dingwells Mills, Prince Edward Island.

Whether your tastes run to drama, history, fiction, religion or law; this film will rivet you to the screen as you watch it unfold. More than that, you will find yourself thinking about Belinda; and the plight of those like her; long after the last frame has shown on your screen. I think that was the intent. This is a film with much to say.

"The Talmud" by Harry Freedman (2104)

Get ready to relearn some of the things you think you already know about the Talmud with this exciting and compelling book by author Harry Freedman. It’s exciting because the Talmud is often confusing to people who are not of the Jewish faith; prompting some to ask me where they can get a “Jewish Bible.” I usually answer “Well, just rip the last 300 or so pages out of your King James Version and you’ll have a Jewish bible.” But that doesn’t really explain much. This book does a better job of it than I do.

The reason for the confusion is simple enough. Many Jews; Rabbi’s included; often tell stories from the Mishnah or the Talmud, which lead the listener to think they are hearing stories from a Jewish Bible. A few years ago I went to a temple to see a lecture on Judaism which was aimed at non-Jews. The audience was left in the dust as soon as the Rabbi began relating stories from the Mishnah and Talmud, giving them the full weight of Biblical stories and confusing the audience in the process.

The importance of this book is that it serves as a ground level entry for the seriously interested; or confused; where the Jewish faith is concerned. The Talmud is simply a codification of the first 5 Books of Moses which comprise the Jewish Torah. It is often referred to as the Old Testament; unless you’re Jewish. Then it’s simply the Torah.

The Talmud goes hand in hand with the Mishnah in that it explains further the traditions and meanings behind the Commandments spelled out in the Torah itself. These are the explanations behind the 613 Commandments contained in the Torah. And you thought it was hard enough to keep only 10! These explanations are akin to the Christian Parables. While they may not be the actual word of God, they are important in the understanding of the New Testament and the things which Jesus did. The same is true of the Talmud.

The author very carefully goes though the history behind the Talmud, beginning with the Torah; or the 5 Books of Moses; which was handed down to Moses on Mt. Sinai some 3,000 years ago. That was called the written law. But the next step was the “oral law”, which was not transcribed but verbally transmitted by Moses to Joshua in the desert after Mt. Sinai. Think of this as Moses telling Joshua all the details of his encounter with the God of Abraham.

Next there came the Mishnah, in about 100B.C. This was a codification of the 5 Books of Moses and it would be written and reworked for over 2 centuries, until about 100 A.D. This codification explained just how to accomplish the 613 commandments in the Bible. It is divided into 63 sections and is the forerunner to the Talmud itself, which first made its appearance around 150 A.D. during the Roman occupation of the Holy Land. This is known as the Jerusalem Talmud, not to be confused with the later Babylonian Talmud, which was written between the years 230 and 500 A.D.

The book also gives great insight into the differences between the Saducees and the Pharisees. These 2 sects were somewhat akin to the differences between Conservatives and Liberal, with the Saducees, who had assimilated with the Romans, believing only in the Torah and not the Oral Law or the Mishnah, making them kind of like today’s Conservatives. The Pharisees, on the other hand, believed in the Torah and the Mishnah. They believed that the two went hand in hand, with the Mishnah guiding the understanding of the Torah. Kind of like the “living Constitution” in which today’s Liberals believe.

The author takes the history all the way forward through the centuries, examining each of the times in the world’s history when we almost lost the Talmud, along with the race of people who were chosen to receive the Torah. For those who wonder why that is of any importance this book will both educate and enlighten you. 

You needn’t be Jewish to enjoy this book; it has much to offer in the way of explaining today’s religious differences, many of which drive today’s world politics. That’s the part which makes it compelling.

Misrepresenting Deuteronomy 30:19

This is the face of God; as depicted by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel. If he looks angry he has good reason. People are misrepresenting his words again. Bear in mind, this is not a post about abortion. Rather it is about the misrepresentation of the Holy Bible for political purposes. It is an issue I feel very strongly about and I hope that you will understand the point I am trying to make. That is; no matter what your views on the topic of abortion may be; it is never okay to misrepresent the Bible. It means too much to too many for it to be politicized by any group, for any reason. 

Sometimes politicians and political groups do us a favor when they send out their propaganda. Last week was one of those times. I got a big, over sized postcard type of advertisement about voting for Pro-Life candidates in the recent election. There’s nothing wrong with that; this is America. We encourage that sort of thing. It’s healthy.

The only thing I find objectionable about it is that they quote 2 words; completely out of context; from Deuteronomy 30:19. They have adopted these 2 words as their clarion call although they have nothing to do with abortion.

I call your attention to the use of these 2 words; “Choose Life”; as a false way to make a case concerning abortion; either for or against; with anyone who is familiar with Deuteronomy. Not only is it disrespecting of the Bible; but it also assumes a certain ignorance on the part of the reader. And, in this case, that reader is me.

So, I asked several different people with whom I interact in the course of the day where the quote “Choose Life” came from. I made sure to ask people that I know well enough to preface the question with “Do you go to church?” I also asked if they were Pro-Life. I asked people with these beliefs because it is their groups which have been using the quote. It would have been pointless to ask this question of people who do not believe in God, or are Pro-Choice.

It broke down to only 2 people; out of a total of 5; even knowing where the phrase “Choose Life” came from; other than a vague reference to “it’s in the Bible.” And of the entire group not one could tell me how it related to abortion at all beyond the obvious quotation. And there’s a good reason for that. It doesn't.

Deuteronomy 30:19 taken out of context is a nice slogan; period. It has no reference to abortion; either for or against. It is troubling to me on several levels that so many people have been using this slogan for so long without even questioning its context.

It’s kind of like when Obama was going to that church in Chicago with Jeremiah Wright and claimed not to have understood what Reverend Wright was saying when he dammed America. For years the President claims to have sat there without knowing; or apparently even listening. No one believed him, including me. But if this Deuteronomy thing is any indication of how people do not listen; but blindly follow religious leaders; then perhaps I was being too harsh on the President.

Deuteronomy 30:19 follows 30:17 and 30:18 in a very coherent manner. It talks about “choosing life” in 30:19 rather than accepting the alternative of death which is promised in 30:17 when it says; “...if your heart turns away and you worship other Gods and serve them. 30:18 I announce to you today that you shall surely perish. You shall not prolong your days in the land which you cross over the Jordan to go in and possess. #30:19 I call heaven and earth as witness against you- that I have set before you life and death. Therefore choose life, that you and your descendants might live.”

Deuteronomy 30:19 is the conclusion of the thoughts begun earlier in the chapter; particularly sections 30:17 and 30:18. Please grab your nearest Bible and read for yourselves. I have used a 1985 King James Version placed by the Gideon's; commonly called a Gideon's Bible. Technically this is a New King James Version Bible and the translation most commonly used by Christians worldwide.

I don’t mind differing political points of view. As I have said, I find that to be healthy. What does make me mad are the organizations who play upon the religious emotions of uninformed people like a harp. And it’s especially annoying to me when people misquote the Old Testament out of context to make their political point. Not only that; it actually serves to undermine the credibility of their point of view.

Yom Kippur - 5775

For all of my Jewish readers; myself included; this evening marks the beginning of our holiest day in the year, Yom Kippur, or the Day of Atonement. On this day, many Jews the world over, will be fasting until sundown tomorrow in an effort to cleanse ourselves of any sins we have committed in the past year. That’s the part where we apologize to God for any offenses we may have committed against Him.

But Yom Kippur is also about making amends with the individuals you may have offended, and this must be done directly, not through God. Traditionally, after you have asked forgiveness of the offended party 3 times, you are released from your obligation, and the sin of “unforgiveness” then falls upon the one who was originally aggrieved; as they would seem to lack the ability to forgive. 

It is a most interesting concept, and not as easily accomplished as one would think. The perception of just who was responsible for the affront is subjective at best, making this one of the most difficult of the Commandments to fulfill, as it involves pride.

The painting above is called “Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur” and was painted in 1878 by artist Maurycy Gottlieb. To all my readers, regardless of faith, may we come together in the year ahead. The alternative to not doing so is almost unthinkable.

"Moby Dick" - A Sermon in a Book

What better book for a Sunday Sermon than Herman Melville’s immortal “Moby Dick”. So many people complain about having to read this book in high school and college classes. I have even heard it referred to as being irrelevant. What a shame! 

This book has grown more relevant with each passing year since it was first released in 1851. Though unappreciated when it was first released, over time it has become recognized as a true classic with a real message about human frailty and vengeance.

The story of Ishmael, the novice whaler, and his journey through an immoral and indifferent world has never lost its relevancy or its bite. We still live in a world of Ahab’s chasing personifications of Evil, mostly to the detriment of the innocent.

The questions raised within this book are timeless and universal. Who has the right to Vengeance? Is it the provenance of the man afflicted by Evil? Or does Vengeance truly belong to a Power larger than ourselves?

As a literary gem, this book is still worth the time it takes to read it. From the naming of Ishmael as the principal character, to the Resurrection of the coffin after the Apocalyptic battle between Ahab and the Whale, the book is filled with references to Scripture and the lessons within.

Perhaps, in our modern world of 60 second sound bites and fleeting fifteen minute fame, the book seems overly complicated. There are no special effects; just meaningful words spoken by characters both flawed and innocent. That alone should make the story both familiar and applicable to just about everybody you know.

Public Prayer - Calling God "God"

Last week’s Supreme Court ruling kind of caught me off guard. I knew the Court was going to come down in favor of Public Prayer; and I am not in disagreement over that point; but I was surprised that they would uphold Sectarian Prayer. After all, this is really the heart of the issue.

Very few people have a problem with public prayer; per se. I fall into this category. It doesn’t bother me in the least when the government invokes the name of God. I find it comforting. What makes me uncomfortable is when the government gives Him a name. In the Navy the Chaplain always referred to God as "Our Father", as in the Psalm. Nobody ever complained about that back then. Today that would be offensive to some women.

Generally speaking, people believe in God in one way or another. Atheists have no horse in this race as far as I can see, since you cannot protest what you profess not to believe in. Those who do believe just call him by different names. There’s Buddha, Jesus and Mohammed, along with a whole cluster of other Gods too numerous to mention here. And, of course, some of us just call Him God. That last category is representative of me. I believe in God. Just plain old God. Kind of like the picture above. He has His good days and bad days; just like you and me, only on a larger scale.

The question really boils down to this; if I can respect your God by calling him God; which doesn't offend you; then why can’t you respect my beliefs by calling him God instead of Jesus or Allah etc. when in a public forum? It seems so simple. And it’s inclusive rather than divisive. Isn't that what religion is supposed to do?

Then there is the legalistic aspect of this issue. Town Meetings; Zoning Commission Hearings; etc, all result in legal consequences, just as in a Court of Law where you are asked to swear an Oath to God. Give me an oath to Jesus, and as a Jew I might not feel morally bound to an entity in which I do not believe. Would it still be perjury? This is inconsistency in its worst incarnation. It is embarrassing to me as an American  that the Justices do not understand this.

Also there is nothing as rude as being invited to a town meeting, or high school reunion for that matter; where the people in charge know there will be multiple faiths represented; then having a blessing representative of only a portion of those present.

This is akin to Shylock being offered dinner at the home of Basanio in “The Merchant of Venice.” He is welcome to come and eat of the pork which Antonio’s own prophet; Jesus; would have had to decline. This is the exact same position that people of various faiths are placed in when you invite them to a meeting; or reunion; and then conduct a prayer which excludes them. Think about it; and then tell me “What Jesus Would Do”.

The illustration at the top is the face of God as envisioned by Michelangelo. Kind of how I see him myself.

"Consequences" - Lena Horne and Eddie Rochester

There's nothing like watching "Cabin in the Sky" to put things into perspective. The simplicity of the plot is designed so that everyone can identify with it. Unlike the symbolism of "Moby Dick", or "Heart of Darkness"; both of which explore the consequences of evil; this film lays it out in plain language.

The story, which centers around the character of Little Joe, is straightforward. Little Joe has been hurt in a fight while gambling and now the Devil has come for him. But an Archangel also shows up at his bedside to claim Little Joe's soul for Heaven.

What follows is an all out battle for Little Joe's soul, with the Devil giving it his all to make sure that Little Joe pays for his sins. But the Archangel has some tricks of his own which he is bound to try before he gives up.

In this scene Little Joe is being tempted; again; by Lena Horne's character. And he tries his best to resist her charms. One of the most remarkable things about this video is the contrast between Eddie Rochester's vocal and that of Ms. Horne's. It juxtaposes the rough and coarse nature of Little Joe's singing; and hence sinful ways; with that of Lena Horne's smooth and sultry performance, kind of seductive, like the Devil would be. In a way it is also emblematic of the difference between Little Joe and Petunia, played by Ethel Waters. Joe has to fight the Devil, while Petunia embraces the Lord. They are as different as night and day; save for one thing. They truly love one another.

And, in the end, the only thing which can save Little Joe from his fate is the love of his woman, Petunia, who who just loves Little Joe so much that she can't even bear the thought of Heaven without him there. Rather than follow her faith into the Heaven she has earned, she turns her back upon God, and her reward, choosing to go instead with Little Joe. Her love and commitment to him impress the Lord so much that he takes them both.

So, ultimately, Little Joe gets to Heaven on a pass from Petunia. And, she is being rewarded for her faith that everything would turn out okay. But, remember, it was really her love that saved Little Joe from "those old devil consequences".

"Gracie - A Love Story" by George Burns (1988)

What can be said about a book that is so good I have read it three times since it was released in 1988? The book is a love story; just as the title states; but it is also a history of vaudeville, as well as a bare display of the humor and affection which Mr. Burns’ clearly held for  both his wife, as well as their craft.

Married for almost 40 years to a woman whose age he did not know; her birth certificate was destroyed in the San Francisco Earthquake; Mr. Burns only really discovered himself when he met the tiny, five foot tall, 100 pound Gracie. She was at least 10 years his junior, and he was all of 27 at the time.

In a way, they were the perfect couple for their time. Life was new to them, and radio was new to the world. Just as they were learning how to live, the medium of radio was doing the same. And as the medium grew, so did Burns and Allen. Successfully wooing his rival for Gracie’s affections wasn’t easy; but he did it just the same. When she fell ill out west on a vaudeville tour with George, he made sure she never received his flowers or calls, sort of “salting the shaft” you might say. Call it what you like, he got the girl.

From radio the two moved on to do several movies, many with other stars in productions like Broadway melody of 1932, which was their first big film. And who can forget them with W.C. Fields in “The Big Broadcast of 1936”? That is still one of my favorite films to watch when I am feeling down.

The book serves as a tribute by Mr. Burns to his wife, who died at the age of 58 years old from a heart condition. But along the way, she ran for President on the Surprise Party Ticket against Roosevelt in 1940, launched a nationwide search for her brother; who really did exist and was not missing; and generally surpassed the standard for the “Dumb Dora” type of actress, while still preserving her own artistic integrity. As George Burns points out, she never threw a pie, nor took one in the face for a laugh. She got her laughs as being the soul of the nation. They came to love her through her appearance on radio, in movies, and still later, in their own living rooms as Gracie and Allen explored the limits of a new medium called television.

Written in 1988, when George Burns didn’t know he had another dozen years to go, he kept us laughing right up until the end, but never forgot his beginnings. Each time he would plan to do a new show; or make a movie; he would go to the cemetery where Gracie was buried and talk to her about it. If the vibes were right, he’d do it. One of the greatest love stories to ever come out of Hollywood, this book is a loving tribute to a woman who was so much more than she appeared to be. And when you find out just who she truly was, you will love her all the more. Oh, by the way, George Burns wasn’t half bad himself. It’s just that he was twice as good with Gracie. I hope he’s puffing on his cigar. (Read this book and then you will understand that last line.)

Alan Parsons Project - "The Eye In the Sky" (1982)

This seemed like a good post for a Sunday morning; kind of a way to remind us all that we are only here by something we don't fully understand. Some call it God, others science. I have always believed in the compatibility of both. Take some time and follow the lyrics while listening to the song. It may make an impression upon you. If not; then it's just a good song.

The Alan Parsons Project- "Eye in the Sky" (1982)

Don't think sorry's easily said
Don't try turning tables instead
Youv'e taken lots of chances before
But I'm not gonna give anymore
Don't ask me
That's how it goes
Cause part of me knows what youre thinkin

Don't say words youre gonna regret
Don't let the fire rush to your head
Ive heard the accusation before
And I ain't gonna take any more
Believe me
The sun in your eyes
Made some of the lies worth believing

Chorus:
I am the eye in the sky
Looking at you
I can read your mind
I am the maker of rules
Dealing with fools
I can cheat you blind
And I dont need to see any more
To know that
I can read your mind, I can read your mind

Dont leave false illusions behind
Dont cry cause I aint changing my mind
So find another fool like before
Cause I aint gonna live anymore believing
Some of the lies while all of the signs are deceiving

Joan Osborne - "One of Us" (Live-1996)

This is the hit song "One of Us" from Joan Osborne's 1995 album "Relish". I have always contended that if God were to walk amongst us today; or if Jesus Christ walked into a church; both would be carted away as lunatics. Ms. Osborne was in town a few nights ago, performing at the Visulite Theatre in Charlotte. A small venue, which holds about 600 people at the most, this would have been the ideal place to see and hear her.

I have always enjoyed this song. It poses questions, which we have all asked ourselves at one time or another, concerning religion, faith and what I like to term "the human condition." The lyrics were not meant to offend, but rather to make us examine our own faith in whatever we believe. It also pointedly asks how much effort we are willing to put into our beliefs, no matter what they are. This acoustic version may lack the bite of the lead guitar on the studio track, but the message is still clear. "I am he, as you are he, as you are me, and we are all together." That about sums it up.

One Of Us by Joan Osborne

If God had a name, what would it be
And would you call it to his face
If you were faced with him in all his glory
What would you ask if you had just one question

And yeah yeah God is great yeah yeah God is good
yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah

What if God was one of us
Just a slob like one of us
Just a stranger on the bus
Trying to make his way home

If God had a face what would it look like
And would you want to see
If seeing meant that you would have to believe
In things like heaven and in jesus and the saints and all the prophets

And yeah yeah god is great yeah yeah god is good
yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah

What if God was one of us
Just a slob like one of us
Just a stranger on the bus
Trying to make his way home
He's trying to make his way home
Back up to heaven all alone
Nobody calling on the phone
Except for the pope maybe in rome

And yeah yeah God is great yeah yeah God is good
yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah

What if god was one of us
Just a slob like one of us
Just a stranger on the bus
Trying to make his way home
Just trying to make his way home
Like a holy rolling stone
Back up to heaven all alone
Just trying to make his way home
Nobody calling on the phone
Except for the pope maybe in rome

Is It Wrong to be Angry with God?

The Following was published in the Saturday Charlotte Observer as part of an article titled "Voices of Faith", which is a weekly column dealing with issues of religion. Sometimes they can be very insightful, as in this answer to the question posed in the title. It more closely resembles the outlook of the Jewish faith, than the Catholic viewpoint. I found it interesting that it comes from a Catholic Minister, and so, being Sunday, I thought I would share it here.

This is the face of God, as depicted by Michaelangelo in the Sistine Chapel.When trying to select a suitable illustration, I decided to use this stern depiction in order to evoke the image of an Old Testament "fire and brimstone" sort of God. The text below is very consistent with my own beliefs, though I usually refer to Noah arguing about how much wine to take aboard the Ark, as well as the haggling betwen Lot and God concerning how many righteous people he needed to find in order to spare Sodom, as evidence of man's ongoing battle with his Creator.

The Rev. Pat Rush, Pastor, Visitation Catholic Church, Kansas City, Missouri:

In the Bible, it seems that God’s people of the First Covenant are more comfortable arguing with God and complaining about God’s perceived lapses in duty than most Christians are. The prophets Jeremiah and Habakkuk, as well as the Book of Job, are prime examples of this.

Those writings evidence the presumption that even a divinely made covenant is a two-way street and the sense that sometimes God forgets about God’s end of the bargain. Habakkuk complained that God was not listening, because God had promised to be a rock of safety for his people, and, when their enemies attacked and defeated them, God failed to intervene.

People influenced by this tradition are not afraid to argue with God and complain when it feels that the Lord is neglecting them. This attitude is not rooted in a shallowness of faith.

Rather, it is usually rooted in a faith relationship so strong that an honest exchange is acceptable and in no way damaging. It is rooted in a faith conviction that God’s commitment to us is so deep that God can handle our disappointment and anger.

God did respond to those biblical heroes who brought their complaints to him. God said, “stay faithful because good things will come, just not now and not as you expect.” God said they, and we must live in patient trust.

God’s love is steadfast in the face of anger.

Two Poems

I wasn't sure whether I wanted to put these two poems on here. It's risky. They deal with my own struggles concerning religion. They are not emblematic of my system of beliefs. They are, rather, questions that I have posed to myself many times over the course of my life. They contain no insights, and draw no conclusions. It is my hope that they offend no one, and that you will enjoy them simply for what they are.


My Prayer

Now I lay me down to sleep
I pray the Lord my soul to keep
It's not like I was using it right now.

And late at night I lay awake
And pray the Lord my soul to take
I had no plans for it anyhow.

Sometimes I get on my knees
Say hear me Lord and help me please
And bless this food that I eat today-
I'm gonna have to eat it anyway...

Hear O Israel, God is One.
And let thy Holy will be done.
Down here on earth as well as in the sky,
But mostly I just pray that I'll get by...


Salvation

It’s hard to visualize it
when you’re trying to survive out
In the wind and the thunder and the rain.
Lightning can be frightening
and there’s not too much inviting
When you’re frozen with fear and numb with pain.

But you keep on believing
that someday you’ll be receiving of
The thing that you’ve been chasing for so long.
Don’t let up on trying
and you’ll find yourself arriving at a place
Call it heaven – call it home.

In the sense of what is beautiful
I prefer unusual,
Once gotten used to - doesn’t feel so strange.
The things that seemed impossible
and even implausible
Can suddenly seem not so out of range.

Some find it inconceivable–
and other's say believable
Otherwise He only died in vain.
If you think He wasn’t anointed
Then you can’t be disappointed, in someone
Who only tried to ease your pain.

And I find it quite amusing
And a little bit confusing
That relief can be found in a song,
While prayers can be chanted
The relief that gets granted
Don’t last long.

You may feel you’re forsaken
For the liberties you’ve taken
And you've hoped to be forgiven for your wrongs.

So therein lies the lesson-
that the ones you were impressing
With the shortcuts you have taken for their trust,
Can not leave you complaining of the
ones that you’ll remain with
When it all- turns to dust...