The Power of Prayer

The Power of Prayer

The church in America would do well to take lessons from the church throughout the world that is exploding with prayer.  A missionary friend of mine has seen an explosion of miracles and healings (more on that to follow).

These quotes challenge and empower me to ‘pray without ceasing’:

“… prayer is powerful… in fact, it is probably much more powerful
than you and I have ever imagined. The reason we aren’t convinced of
the fact is that we usually fail to pray, consistently, intensely, and
strategically…”-Chip Ingram
“… If you’ve ever wondered what your missing in the Christian life,
look here first. A commitment to intercessory prayer changes lives.
If you want to know who the most influential people in the world are?
When we think of power, we usually first think about presidents and
business moguls or cultural icons like movie stars and sports figures.
But in God’s economy, those people have very little influence. S.D.
Gordon words it well: the great people of the earth today are people
who pray…”-Chip Ingram

Surrendered in Praise

check out this link to the Jeremy Riddle song Surrendered in Praise

http://s0.ilike.com/play#Jeremy+Riddle:Surrendered+In+Praise:109656268:s41489609.10987201.14041466.0.2.50%2Cstd_be1756b6612f4da6a04105fe3fcc09b2

Whenever I’m low and sinking down
When I’m overwhelmed and doubts abound
When I’ve lost all heart and the will to fight
When despair sets in and my day is night

Lift up my head, make steel my gaze
Cast out my fear, move me to faith
Surrendered in praise
To Your glorious grace, Jesus

Whenever I’m tired and I feel alone
When oppression mounts and trials come
When the father of lies, his arrows fly
When there are no answers
And my dreams, they die

In my heart of hearts where these battles rage
My strength it fails and my courage fades
In my distress I cry aloud to You

You lift my head, and You steel my gaze
You cast out fear, and I’m moved to faith
Surrendered in praise
To Your glorious grace, Jesus

Too Much of a Good Thing WILL Kill You

In today’s encore excerpt – dopamine, pleasure, and too much pleasure:

“The importance of dopamine was discovered by accident. In 1954, James Olds and Peter Milner, two neuroscientists at McGill University, decided to implant an electrode deep into the center of a rat’s brain. The precise placement of the electrode was largely happenstance; at the time, the geography of the mind remained a mystery. But Olds and Milner got lucky. They inserted the needle right next to the nucleus accumbens (NAcc), a part of the brain that generates pleasurable feelings. Whenever you eat a piece of chocolate cake, or listen to a favorite pop song, or watch your favorite team win the World Series, it is your NAcc that helps you feel so happy.

“But Olds and Milner quickly discovered that too much pleasure can be fatal. They placed the electrodes in several rodents’ brains and then ran a small current into each wire, making the NAccs continually excited. The scientists noticed that the rodents lost interest in everything. They stopped eating and drinking. All courtship behavior ceased. The rats would just huddle in the corners of their cages, transfixed by their bliss. Within days, all of the animals had perished. They died of thirst.

“It took several decades of painstaking research, but neuroscientists eventually discovered that the rats had been suffering from an excess of dopamine. The stimulation of the NAcc triggered a massive release of the neurotransmitter, which overwhelmed the rodents with ecstasy. In humans, addictive drugs work the same way: a crack addict who has just gotten a fix is no different than a rat in an electrical rapture. The brains of both creatures have been blinded by pleasure. This, then, became the dopaminergic cliche; it was the chemical explanation for sex, drugs, and rock and roll.

“But happiness isn’t the only feeling that dopamine produces. Scientists now know that this neurotransmitter helps to regulate all of our emotions, from the first stirrings of love to the most visceral forms of disgust. It is the common neural currency of the mind, the molecule that helps us decide among alternatives. By looking at how dopamine works inside the brain, we can see why feelings are capable of providing deep insights. While Plato disparaged emotions as irrational and untrustworthy – the wild horses of the soul – they actually reflect an enormous amount of invisible analysis.”

Author: Jonah Lehrer
Title: How We Decide
Publisher: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
Date: Copyright 2009 by Jonah Lehrer
Pages: Kindle Loc. 463-538.

Whiffle Guitar: What is my Calling?

Are you using your guitar as a whiffle bat? It may work but it might be best to play music with it.

Marshill’s newest pastor does a GREAT job of describing how to better find our calling in life….

How do we know God’s will? How do we know our calling?

This sermon ends with a GREAT spiritual meditative prayer exercise that I highly recommend.

Please let us know what you think.

Cancer Victim Advice: Keep your appointments & don’t put your life on hold

My high school reunion is coming up, and the funds from the reunion will go toward Hand in Hand: Suzanne R. Leider Memorial Assistance Fund, which was founded in 2003 in her name.  I knew Suzie; she was a classmate of mine.  She had some powerful things to say to cancer victims:

“It was Leider’s dream to be able to provide financial assistance to those seeking second opinions with their sarcoma.
On her website, before she died, Leider wrote: “In closing, I would like to share two simple messages that can profoundly impact the life of a cancer patient. First, for those who have a diagnosis of cancer, maintain your follow-up appointments and tests. Until there is a cure, I believe that early detection is essential in the fight against cancer. Secondly, never succumb to the belief that your life is on hold because you have cancer or that cancer define who you are.”
“Strive to live, experience and thrive in the midst of cancer!” Leider added.”

It is NOT about IQ!

Today’s post is about IQ.  From a very early age, I was taught that all that mattered was how smart you are and how high your IQ is.  I have always struggled with such a notion because there are many happy and successful people that are not geniuses.  It is sad to have such a rigid, narrow, and ignorant perspective.  The people that I have met who claim that IQ is so important tend to be those who are mostly unhappy, lonely, and proud-living in an ivory tower of their own making. It turns out that it is NOT about IQ!

“Over the years, an enormous amount of research has been done in an attempt to determine how a person’s performance on an IQ test…translates to real-life success…The relationship between success and IQ only works up to a point. Once someone has reached an IQ of somewhere around 120, having additional IQ points doesn’t seem to translate into any measurable real-world advantage.”

After listing where the last 25 Nobel Loreates in Chemistry and Medicine gradutate from college, it is clear that you don’t have to go to Harvard to be successful. “To be a Nobel Prize winner, apparently, you have to be smart enough to get into…college…That’s all….”

“In a devastating critique, the sociologist Pitirim Sorokin once showed that if Terman had simply put together a randomly selected group of children from the same kinds of family backgrounds as the Termites–and dispensed with IQs altogether–he would have ended up with a group doing almost as many impressive things as his painstakingly selected group of genisues. ‘By no stretch of the imagination or of standars of genius,’ Sorokin concluded, ‘is the ‘gifted group’ as a whole ‘gifted.'” By the time Terman came out with his fourth volume of Genetic Studies of Genius, the word ‘genius’ had all but vanished. ‘We have seen,’ Terman concluded, with more than a touch of disappointment, ‘that intellect and achievement are far from perfectly correlated.”

“You can have lots of analytical intelligence and very little practical intelligence, or lots of practical intelligence and not much analytical intelligence…so where does something like practical intelligence come from? We know where analytical intelligence comes from. It’s something, at least in part, that’s in your genes…But social savvy is knowledge. It’s a set of skills that have to be learned. It has to come from somewhere, and the place where we seem to get these kinds of attitudes and skills is from our families.”

“What was the difference between the As and the Cs? Terman ran through every conceivable explanation. He looked at their physical and mental health…he compared…what their precise IQ scores were in elementary and high school. In the end, only one thing mattered: family background. The As overwhelmingly came from…homes filled with books…etc…the Cs lacked…a community around them that prepared them properly for the world.”

Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell

Unnoticed Wonders

A poem written by my daughter-

Unnoticed Wonders

Dedicated to the small things we love, but never pay attention to

A brand new box of sharp, colorful crayons

The way the ocean feels on bare feet

A leaf’s delicate design

The taste of fresh, red apples

A puppy’s velvety ears

The smell of a new book

The wind blowing in your face

Splashing in puddles

The birds’ chirping

Roasting marshmallows

A sense of accomplishment

Laughter

Dessert

The way your hair floats around you when you’re underwater

Riding a roller coaster

Being told that you’re good at something

Catching your first fish

Swinging on a swing

Being with your friends

Dressing up

Getting a present

Doing a fun craft

Sitting by the fire

Watching lightning flash across the sky

Drinking cool lemonade on a hot July day

Imagining what it would feel like to fly

Playing an exciting game

 Staying up late

Watching a movie while eating popcorn

Jumping on the trampoline

Playing tag

Mom’s Euology

My Mom died last week: December 16, 1929-July 12, 2010

I was asked to give her Euology:

believe, love, live

believe.

My Mom was proud of her English degree from Berkley. She would always tell me of the time that she got spit on while she was riding on the San Francisco trolly with her African American girlfriend, and the special privileges she got as an English major. Only the English majors were allowed to read the books in the locked cabinet in the library–catcher In the Rye and Chaucer books.

When it came time for me to decide between Berkley and Stanford the decision was made easy by Mom. “You are going to Stanford!” much to her surprise I came back a changeling as she sometimes would call me.

I believe-I remember exactly where I was standing in our house when I first broached the subject of faith with Mom. She said, “You didn’t become born again did you!” I simply told her that I discovered that there is a God who loves us and is all perfect and all loving who wants to be in relationship with us. It is like taking a test and I have taken a lot of tests. If God is perfect, then He gets 100% on the moral test of life, mother theresa gets on her best day 90%, and well I might get to 50%. The only way to be in an intimate relationship with a perfect, all Holy Being is to ace the moral test which no one can accept God. Solution: God came down in human form as Jesus to take the test for us. All we have to do is accept His gift and say I believe. The following day Mom said, “well, I prayed to accept Jesus into my heart, but nothing happened.” She didn’t like to talk about her faith much or mine for that matter. It was 15 years later when she showed up and sat in the back of the auditorium while I was teaching about the evidence of God from science and philosophy that we spoke again of faith. She said afterwards, “of course I have always known Christianity to be true and I wish that all the kids were here.” she ended a lot of her sentences that way.

She believed in Christ and she believed in all of us. When we were discouraged she would always be there to lift us up. When I had no friends and felt like the world was ending in 7th grade she said, “you have always been a good swimmer. Why don’t you join a swim team.” her belief in me and many of us changed the course of our lives.

She was an avid reader and she loved Langston Hughes poetry. She shared her favorite one with each of her kids….a poem of inspiration and of believing in us…

Well…I’ll tell you:
Life for me ain’t been no crystal stair.
It’s had tacks in it,
And splinters,
And boards torn up,
And places with no carpet on the floor—
Bare.
But all the time
I’se been a-climbin’ on,
And reachin’ landin’s,
And turnin’ corners,
And sometimes goin’ in the dark
Where there ain’t been no light.
So…don’t you turn back.
Don’t you set down on the steps.
‘Cause you finds it’s kinder hard.
Don’t you fall now—
For I’se still goin’, honey,
I’se still climbin’,
And life for me ain’t been no crystal stair.

love.

Prodigal son-there is an ancient story modernized by Brennan Manning…there was a bright young man….this is the love of God…unconditional, outrageous, crazy

Mom didn’t speak of her faith but she showed it through her unconditional love of me and my kids…an amazing and rare gift to give to all of our kids and those around us…

live on.

Grandma is so lucky! The night mom died I was trying to think of something to say when I tucked my oldest son in for bed…but before I could say anything..he said, “Grandma is SO lucky!”   We have been so lucky, so blessed to love her. But we must remember that she is the lucky one.

We think we live in disneyland let me tell u this is not disneyland…a friend of mine has told me the story of his sons first trip to Disneyland. They went through the gate and he saw all the flowers and just knew that he had made it into Disneyland, and when his dad tried to tell him that this wasn’t Disneyland he refused to budge. We think we r in Disneyland when in reality we r only at the entrance.

“follow the balloons”-when my sister was visiting with Mom in the hospital, and she told Mom that she was going to go down stairs to the cafeteria to get something to drink. Mom said, “just follow the balloons..” This is a time to celebrate because Grandma, Mom has followed the balloons pass the entrance and through the gates to the real Disneyland and she lives on…and she is SO lucky…and we will see her again…it is not good bye but see u later…release the balloon to know that mom is now finally at Disneyland…

Let us release these balloons, and remember the lessons she taught all of us…to believe and to love….

America and Healthcare Reform by Greg Henry

Examining the American Proposition

Health care debate must necessarily begin with a discussion of America’s root political philosophies.

As summer progresses, hardly a day goes by that doesn’t challenge America’s hegemony, from the Gulf of Mexico turning into an oil slick to the Iranians amassing nuclear weapons. In the midst of the chaos, we have to live with a health care reform bill which has nothing to do with health care and virtually nothing to do with reform. The reason I believe that America became so polarized and divided on this issue is that we have forgotten the philosophical basis on which our country was built. This is not Europe, Canada or Mexico. This is a unique country once known for greatness and now known for ambivalence and timidity.

To properly review our origins, I believe we need to go back to a few key philosophic texts. This year marks the 50th anniversary of the publication of John Courtney Murray’s landmark book We Hold These Truths; Catholic Reflections on the American Proposition. Murray’s four pillars of the American experience will help form the lens through which we should be able to view any and all governmental activities. The first of these inherited truths is that we are a nation of judgment and one which is dependent upon individuals to be above the lies of politics. This view, much like that of Edmund Burke, distinguishes the Anglo-American political tradition from that of continental Europe, which subjects the individual to the whims of the state.

It is very interesting to note that everyone in the United States argues about the individual’s rights, but no one ever speaks of the individual’s responsibilities. What may seem good, kind and reasonable today may bankrupt another generation. Adding money to social security benefits may seem a good thing to do at this time, but may be putting a noose around our children’s necks.

The second foundational truth of the American proposition grew out of the Christian middle ages. It is the principle that just governance exists by and with the consent of the governed. Social pluralism of the middle ages held that the individual put society ahead of government. This is one of those truths which is self evident to everyone and yet practiced by no one. Everyone is looking for an answer and a handout. No one is looking to do any work or to give anything up. “A government that can give you all that you want must take from you all that you have.” The balance of these equations is out of kilter in America at this point in time.

The third truth of the American proposition as quoted by Murray is, “the state is distinct from society, limited in its offices toward society.” Society exists prior to the state. Long before there was the United States of America, long before there was any governmental organization, there were people helping people. There were people drawing reasonable limits, people deciding what they could afford and what the best possible outcome could be. They also understood the idea of futility. Where have these people gone? This medieval distinction between the society at large and its organizational structure, its “government,” need to be put into line so that physicians can enter the discussion with reasonable scientific information, which is balanced with a humanistic approach to the care of their patients.
The fourth component of Murray’s proposition is the profound conviction that only virtuous people can be free. Murray knew that there are no guarantees about the success of freedom. “Freedom can dissipate into license, private license into public decadence and decadence into chaos.”

“It is not an American belief,” Murray wrote, “that free government is inevitable. Only that it is possible. Moreover, its possibility can only be realized when the people as a whole are inwardly governed by recognized imperatives of universal moral law.” This should be an inherent cultural consensus. But unfortunately, there is no inherent cultural consensus. There is no more inherent understanding of limitation. It is only about “me”. We have raised a generation of people who cannot look beyond themselves. I, fortunately was raised by a generation that were molded by two forces, the Great Depression and the Second World War. They understood much clearer the necessity to come together to view the common good. The common good is never a single entity, but it is a moral and ethical internal basis, which says certain things need to be accomplished and others must be put aside.

The public square has lost its luster. The place where intelligent discussion can happen on any of these issues has disappeared. We are surrounded, on all sides, by nitwits of negativity. All you have to do is watch cable television to realize that the grand old days of true intellectual discussion have disappeared. There was a time when William Buckley carried on brilliant debates on his television series, Firing Line. Where are the Buckleys of today? We are surrounded – and I use that term advisedly – by neebobs who can no longer structure sentences or take down ideas in a clear manner without launching into ad hominem arguments as opposed to the ad factio discussion. It is an embarrassment to hear the fundamentally mean-spirited discussions on both the left and right, which stop us from carrying on a philosophical discussion of what will be the base of this government. We have broken into armed camps, which have an immediate negative response to anything said on the other side.

What is the state of understanding ourselves? Murray commented that “the complete loss of one’s identity is, with all propriety of theological definition, hell. In diminished forms, it is insanity, and it would not be well for the American giant to go lumbering about the world today, lost and mad.” What we are watching is the decline of one of the great cultures of western civilization, and until we are able to reestablish the firm pillars on which government makes decisions, there is little good that can be said about the future of health care reform in America.

Reconciliation, apartheid, stride toward freedom

I have been reading national geographic magazine for almost 20 years now, and I have never been moved to tears by any articles in the magazine until now.

In high school, I read Martin Luther King’s book: Stride Toward Freedom, and I wrote a paper based on his chapter titled: “the pilgrimage to non-violence”. It was inspiring and eye opening to me to read and write about.

25 years later, this National Geographic article has had a similar sublime effect on me.

National Geographic Magazine June 2010

Mandela’s Children

South Africa is a vibrant, multiethnic democracy striving, with mixed success, to fulfill its promise. Photojournalist James Nachtwey offers a vision of contemporary life, and Alexandra Fuller tells an intimate story about the long shadow of apartheid.

The Minister

It turns out there is no shortcut, bolt-of-inspiration way to transform a person from layman to minister in the Dutch Reformed Church of South Africa. It takes seven years of rigorous training—seven years of Deon Snyman’s youth—which made it all the more distressing when, toward the end of his studies at the University of Pretoria in 1990, Snyman realized he had all the theology a person could possibly need to function in the old South Africa but almost no skills to guide him in the country that had just released Nelson Mandela.

Snyman, who was born and raised in “a traditional Afrikaans family, in a typical Afrikaans town north of Johannesburg,” says that back then he knew no black people, had no black friends, had never even had a meaningful conversation with a black person. “The church was divided into white congregations, Coloured congregations, Indian congregations, and black congregations,” he says. He decided that the best way he could avoid waking up one morning a foreigner in his own country was to become the minister of a rural, black congregation.

On the day in February 1992 that Deon Snyman was installed as a minister in the Dutch Reformed Church in Africa—the church’s black branch—in Nongoma, in the heart of the KwaZulu homeland, his 54-year-old father stood up in front of the congregation, all of whom were Zulus, and said this: “Well, it is clear that South Africa is going to change. But I am an Afrikaner. I do not know if I have the capacity to change. Also, I am an old man. I do not know if I have the skills to change.” Then the father indicated his 26-year-old son. “So today, I give you my son. If you can teach him the rules of the new South Africa, he can teach us those rules. If you can give him the skills to live in this new country, he can show us those skills.”

In the dozen years Snyman lived among the Zulus as a minister, it became clear that the lesson he had to take back to his own people was this: “Those who supported the system of apartheid need to apologize in a way that will feel sincere. Then they need to make amends in a way that restores some of the dignity and some of the material opportunities that had been eroded under that system.” Snyman started to think about the idea of community-led restitution—the creation, he says, of such emblems of remorse as a school, a clinic, or a skills training center. “Something everyone could point to and say, Here is our symbol of true sorryness, here is a symbol of our decision to build a new way to work together. It was a very deep idea in me.”

But it would be years before Snyman’s imagination was captured by a small Afrikaans farming town in the Western Cape, a community unable to deny that the effects of apartheid had spilled on beyond 1994, when white rule ended and Nelson Mandela became the reborn nation’s first president.

The Town

Worcester is a somnolent, gingerbread town prickled with white church spires an hour and a half northeast of Cape Town. In winter, the surrounding mountains are snowcapped. In summer, heat holds like hell’s breath in the valley and melts the tarmac. The streets are wide and orderly. The houses are gabled and picturesque; lawns are cajoled into neat pockets; there are steroidal roses and trellises hanging grapevines off verandas. It’s the sort of town that makes you wish you’d worn a longer skirt and a higher collar.

In the mid-1990s the lines drawn deep in the geography and psyche of the place by apartheid were still evident, but no more so than elsewhere in the country. It is true that blacks still lived mainly in Zwelethemba township—Worcester’s undernourished twin across the Hex River—while whites still lived on the dappled streets of the town itself or on farms laid at the feet of the mountains. On the other hand, Worcester had elected its first Coloured (mixed race) mayor and its first black deputy mayor. Also, in June 1996 the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)—a courtlike body assembled after the abolition of apartheid—had held a hearing in the town. Victims and perpetrators of torture and abuse under apartheid had stepped forward and testified. The violent past was over, surely.

So it came as a shock when, on a sweltering Christmas Eve afternoon in 1996, two bombs ripped through a shopping area just down the street from the police station and the Dutch Reformed Church. The blasts killed four people—three of them children. Nearly 70 people were injured. All the victims were blacks and Coloureds. The first bomb to go off, around 1:20, hit Olga Macingwane in such a way that her legs swelled instantly to the size of tractor tires. Minutes later, the second bomb went off, and she was blown unconscious.

“For 13 years I never saw the person who did this to me,” Macingwane says, speaking from her sitting room in Zwelethemba on a very warm Sunday morning in late November 2009. Macingwane is a profoundly proper woman of a certain age. She is wearing a pink, ankle-length pencil skirt and matching jacket. Outside her home the township is in the midst of open-air church services, and Macingwane has to raise her voice to be heard. She gets up stiffly—it is obviously painful for her to walk—and closes the door to the yard and to the world at large. The singing reaches into her home unabated. “In my head,” she continues, as the choirs of at least three churches compete on the torrid air, “I pictured him. In my head he is a man of 50 years old, very big, with a long beard and a very severe face. That is the man who did this thing. That is the person I see in my nightmares.”

A Turning Point

South Africa’s selection to host the 2010 World Cup gave people a surge of confidence. Their nation could now be remembered for bringing the world soccer rather than apartheid. South Africa’s modern infrastructure, enviably chic airports, cosmopolitan restaurants—its public face—all support the suggestion that its tragic history is just that, history. Much of Soweto, Johannesburg’s infamous township in which apartheid-era violence visible to the foreign media occurred, is now a series of bucolic suburbs: Florida-lite architecture behind smooth lawns, sleek foreign cars in driveways. (Squatter camps encroaching, it is true.) South Africa has a burgeoning black middle class, and since 1994 the government has built almost three million houses. In Johannesburg, just across the road from a casino and an amusement park, tourists can visit the impressive Apartheid Museum.

But scratch the surface of any community, and one way or another there it is, the A-word. In May 2008 more than 60 people were killed and tens of thousands displaced in xenophobic riots targeting mainly Mozambicans and Zimbabweans. Apartheid ensured a deep mistrust of “other” and a sense of resource entitlement—based as much, if not more, on who you were as on what you did—that carries over to this day.

It is impossible to overestimate the reach and brutality of apartheid. Between 1948 and 1994, when the system was dismantled, the Afrikaans National Party applied hyper-segregation of races to every possible facet of life. “Apartheid so effectively enriched a few at the utter debasement of the majority—to say nothing of the imprisonment of so many, the exile, the disappearances, the violent deaths—that a mere end to the system could not begin to repair the damage,” Tshepo Madlingozi says. Madlingozi is a 31-year-old senior lecturer of law at the University of Pretoria and an advocacy coordinator for the Khulumani Support Group, an organization of 58,000 victims of political violence, mainly during the apartheid era. “You can say, Everybody is equal now; let’s get on with it. That suits those who benefited from the system—but it does nothing to institute restorative justice, and it can’t undo generations of habitual racism, palpable hate, or feelings of inadequacy.”

The Prisoner

Less than a month after the Worcester bombing, 19-year-old Daniel Stephanus “Stefaans” Coetzee phoned the police from his hideout on a farm in the heart of the Great Karoo highlands—a sparsely populated, semiarid region in the central west of the country—and claimed responsibility for his part in the atrocity. Coetzee addressed the police officer in charge with respectful deference: “Oom,” he called him. “Uncle.” He said he had heard that there were children among the dead, and for that reason he had no choice but to turn himself in. The boy had reserved country manners and a country person’s way of keeping himself contained, catlike.

At the time he was taken into custody, and for some years after, Coetzee was a member of nearly every extreme right-wing, white supremacist group in South Africa, including one or two so secret and obscure that not even the people in them seem capable of explaining exactly what they are: Wit Wolwe, Israel Visie, Boere Aanvals Troepe. From prison Coetzee continued to communicate with members of the Ku Klux Klan in the United States and neo-Nazi groups in Germany, encouraging them in their endeavors. He rose up the ranks of the national groups’ pseudo-military structures. As white supremacists go, Coetzee was a poster boy. In the pecking order of the Helderstroom Maximum Security Prison in Western Cape Province, however, he was pond life. “I was 19 years old and white. Everyone wanted to rape me,” Coetzee says of those first years in overcrowded general cells holding between 60 and 120 men. “I couldn’t get a bottom bunk. I couldn’t even get a top bunk. I couldn’t get any bunk at all.” Coetzee slept on the floor.

When I meet him in Pretoria Central Prison in November 2009, where he has been held for over a decade, Coetzee has just turned 32. Having not felt the sun for so long, his skin has leached gray, and although he is strikingly young looking, there is a cluster of fine lines around his eyes such as are usually seen only on a much older man. His hair is dark, very short, and downy. The leather belt he uses to hold up his prison-issue orange overalls is pulled to its last hole. It is not a surprise to learn that before his incarceration he was able to run far and fast in blistering heat with very little fuel or water. “I loved to run,” he says, as if the words might set his legs free again. “Ja, I could run.”

Coetzee and I sit facing each other, knee to knee, in a large, nondescript, yellow room designed for prison visits. Five or six windows along one wall let in a sluggish light that does nothing to enhance the greenish glow from the fluorescents. It is late morning and raining hard, and has been since early last night. As a result, it is cold, and we’re both shivering.

Coetzee tells me he was born in 1977 to a careless mother and a drunken father. He has no memory of his parents being together. At first he lived with his father in the Orange Free State (now the Free State). When he was eight or nine his father burned out. After spending time in an orphanage, Coetzee was sent to live with his mother in Upington in the Northern Cape. For the next six or seven years Coetzee fell through one crack after another and was in and out of welfare homes, until at the age of 15 or 16 he was taken under the wing of a man named Johannes van der Westhuizen. A leader in the ultraright-wing, white supremacist cult Israel Visie, van der Westhuizen was a strict vegetarian, took no drugs, drank no alcohol, and studied a Bible that had been rewritten to bolster the idea that anyone who was not white was an animal of the field. In Coetzee’s eyes, van der Westhuizen was roughly the size and age of a father.

If you were to walk more or less 300 miles northeast of Cape Town until the night sky grew so black you could see all the way back to whatever might be the beginning of time, the odds are good that you would be in the Great Karoo highlands. In the early 1800s this is where outlaws, cattle rustlers, and gunrunners hid, in the vast plains below the bruised Nuweveld Range. Even today so few people are tough or crazy enough to coax a living from this flinty, pepper-scented earth that it’s considered a perfect destination for stargazers—and those who do not wish the modern world to find them. Its remote secretiveness appealed to van der Westhuizen, a man in deep denial about the reality of post-transition South Africa, and it was on his leased farm in this redoubt that the bombing was planned.

“When I was first in prison, I asked for a Bible,” Coetzee says, explaining how he began to dismantle the hatred that had landed him on the floor of a crowded cell in a maximum-security prison. “But the Bible they gave me was not the same Bible I studied when I was with van der Westhuizen. I realized that the Bible I had been reading with him was skewed. That was the first thing.” Then Coetzee was transferred to Pretoria Central Prison, where he took classes on anger management and restorative justice. He wrote a letter to the prison authorities asking if they would allow him to apologize to the people and the families he had hurt. (They advised against it.) But although he felt remorse for what he had done, Coetzee was still a racist.

In early 2002, five years after his arrest, he was assigned to a work detail with an older prisoner, Eugene de Kock. Now in his early 60s, de Kock is serving two life sentences plus 212 years for crimes against humanity committed while he was a colonel heading the notorious secret security unit of the South African Police. (His men dubbed him “prime evil,” a name adopted by the media.) For hours at a time the two men would be together mopping floors. “Eugene was always telling me, ‘Look Stefaans, you have to stop believing you are superior just because of the color of your skin,’ ” Coetzee says. “He said, ‘Take it from me, I’ve learned the hard way.’ I told Eugene, ‘Please stop pestering me.’ But he never shut up about it. He told me that until I stopped being a racist I’d be in two prisons—one around my body, and another one around my heart.”

The Conversation

It is true that if every child from a difficult home in South Africa were to grow up and perform an act of brutality, there would be nothing and no one left in the country. As it is, there are 50 murders every day, and 140 reported rapes, although the actual number is believed to be in the hundreds. “Yes, the habit of violence is very deep in this culture,” Marjorie Jobson, national director of the Khulumani Support Group, says. “You have to remember, the children who grew up in the atmosphere of apartheid—with all the lessons of that era—those children are now adults.”

I have caught a lift with Jobson—a disarmingly mild-mannered doctor in her 50s—from Johannesburg, and we’re driving through the outskirts of Pretoria on a blameless summer afternoon in late 2009. From here, South Africa’s administrative capital seems all flowering impatience—50,000 jacarandas lend the city a mildly campy glamour, and the streets are lined with beds of agapanthus. Advertisements for the World Cup are everywhere; a high-speed-train track is being built parallel to the road.

“Everyone was exhausted by 1994. I think they just wanted apartheid to go away and the government to fix everything. But that didn’t happen,” Jobson says. “It’s up to each individual South African to participate actively in restitution. You know, the power of one. The power one person has to perpetuate our violent past, or the power one person has to contribute to a just, peaceful society.”

In this way our conversation comes back to Coetzee. Sometime in 2004 Jobson received a phone call from Eugene de Kock. Over the years de Kock has tried to help Khulumani locate people who disappeared during the struggle, describing in some detail the manner in which they vanished, mostly because he was responsible for what happened to them. De Kock told Jobson that he had become acquainted over the previous couple of years with a young man called Stefaans Coetzee. “Stefaans wanted to meet with his victims and apologize for what he had done,” she says. Jobson wasn’t opposed to being helpful. The only problem was that Coet zee had no idea who his victims were. He could give no names and—beyond the fact that three of the dead had been children—no identifying characteristics.

The Presidents

In 2005 Thabo Mbeki, in his second term as South Africa’s president, fired Jacob Zuma, the deputy president. Zuma had been implicated in a corruption scandal involving a five-billion-dollar arms deal. (Charges were dropped in April 2009.) Mbeki must have thought ridding himself of this troublesome high priest of populism was a safe bet. But it turned out to be the political kiss of death, causing a deep split within the ruling party, the African National Congress, or ANC. By the end of the year Zuma’s supporters were burning T-shirts with Mbeki’s face on them.

Zuma and Mbeki, although both longtime ANC activists, could not be more unalike. Mbeki is a Xhosa from the Eastern Cape, highly educated and emotionally remote. Zuma is a Zulu from KwaZulu-Natal with no formal education who served a decade-long sentence on Robben Island for opposing apartheid. A charismatic man of action, he has three wives and a rape allegation to his name. (He was acquitted in 2006.)

In 2007 Mbeki announced to both houses of parliament that he had authorized a special dispensation for pardon applications for politically motivated crimes that had taken place between 1994 and 1999. Mbeki’s official explanation was that he wished to finish the business of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Unofficially the move was seen by some as an effort to gain much needed support for the flagging president. The next year a group with a representative from each of the 15 official political parties recommended 120 prisoners for presidential pardon.

“It was an attempt to reach out politically,” Tshepo Madlingozi of the University of Pretoria says. But the process ignored something that had been at the moral, emotional, and political heart of the TRC—the victims would not be consulted before prisoners were granted amnesty. To human rights groups, this special dispensation was not about reconciliation; it was about political expediency, about closing the door and moving on. Eight organizations, including the Khulumani Support Group, filed a lawsuit, which eventually found itself at the Constitutional Court of South Africa, the highest court in the land, on November 10, 2009. By then Mbeki had resigned, and Zuma—JZ as he is popularly known—was president.

The Go-Between

On the list of political prisoners identified for possible pardon, one name jumped out at Marjorie Jobson: the man Eugene de Kock had telephoned her about from prison, Stefaans Coetzee. Meanwhile, Khulumani had reached out to the victims, including Olga Macingwane, of those on the list.

A glance through Jobson’s modest home in Grahamstown in the Eastern Cape reveals books everywhere, piled on furniture in the sitting room, in stacks on the floor, across the dining room table. “On the one hand, the Khulumani group was part of a lawsuit to ensure that the rights of victims were taken into account in this pardoning process,” Jobson says, clearing books off the kitchen table so we can eat lunch. “On the other hand, I was getting more calls all the time from Stefaans’s social worker and his minister, begging me to see if I could get him together with his victims. Not surprisingly, the victims of the Worcester bombing were skeptical. They had questions. Why does he want to meet us now? How is it going to benefit us? Is he feeling guilty now? Has he really had a change of heart?” Jobson sets a bowl of chicken noodle soup in front of me. In her distraction, she fails to eat at all. “I was interested in justice,” she continues, “but I was most interested in the process of reconciliation. It was a conundrum.” In the end Jobson appealed for help to a trusted colleague: Tshepo Madlingozi.

On the day I meet him in his law faculty office, Madlingozi is wearing black jeans, a long-sleeved, blue dress shirt with the sleeves rolled up, and casual leather sneakers. Our conversation is accompanied by the customary cup of tea. “Rooibos or normal?” Madlingozi had asked, offering either South Africa’s native herbal tea or ordinary black tea. Now he blows into his cup and looks at me over the rim. “We made a decision that I should go and see Coetzee and see if he was for real. I was very nervous, very skeptical. I didn’t know how I was going to react.”

A day in mid-April 2009 was set for a meeting between Madlingozi and Coetzee in the social worker’s office at Pretoria Central. “I was expecting someone in my imagination that looked very racist, you know, not this guy who walks into the office. I see a boy the same age as me. He’s somehow handsome, very diffident. He was surprised too. He was expecting to see an old, radical, militant ANC activist.”

Madlingozi shook hands with Coetzee and introduced himself. Coetzee shook Madlingozi’s hand and thanked him for coming. The two men sat for a couple of hours and talked. “Mostly about ourselves,” Madlingozi says. “What does he miss in prison? How did I become a lawyer? How did he become a prisoner? What do we hope for ourselves? What do we hope for our country?”

Madlingozi is a few months younger than Coetzee. He was born in Mangaung township, the area set aside for blacks outside Bloemfontein in the former Orange Free State—geographically not far from where Coetzee was born but a world away in terms of culture. “It was semidesolate and very violent,” he says. Madlingozi’s father was a migrant worker in the gold mines. “Migrant labor was one of the most devastating aspects of the system of apartheid,” Madlingozi says. “It destroyed families. It destroyed communities. It was a way for the apartheid government to get capitalization, but it emasculated men who couldn’t be at home to provide for their families. The fathers couldn’t pass on folklore, culture, values. For the families left behind, it meant the father came back after three months and didn’t know his place in the family. A lot of men asserted their position through violence.”

Madlingozi’s father died of a heart attack when his son was 14. “My mom and I had just relocated to a mining town to be near him. We were just becoming friends again. He had a voracious appetite for reading novels, and we read together a lot.” Madlingozi finished his schooling in Welkom, a gold-mining town laid out in the late 1940s by the Anglo American Corporation. The mines in and around the town are very deep. Each morning, brackish water is pumped from them into pans on the surface. Flocks of flamingos, Egyptian geese, and sacred ibises congregate on the pans. The air is stung with the scents of salt and bird droppings.

Madlingozi leans forward. “Meeting Stefaans has reignited my faith in the future of South Africa,” he says. “My worldview is black consciousness, and that hasn’t changed as a result of knowing Stefaans. But it has made me appreciate that even the most ardent racists—even murderers—can change and be humble. Yes, Stefaans’s intelligence, humility, acute appreciation of the consequences of his actions and the system of apartheid, as well as his appreciation that reconciliation is not merely about showing goodwill, have greatly inspired me.” Madlingozi has both hands under his chin now. “I can see how there might be people criticizing me for selling out. How can I visit this man? How can I have empathy? But this isn’t just about winning. It can’t be about winning. If we only want to win, then there will always be losers, and how is that so different from the way things were? This has always been about the big picture, about moving on together.” Then he laughs and looks at me, almost challengingly. “Mmm, it’s complicated, messy—it can be very personal and always in shades of gray. But that’s where reality is. That’s where we are. That’s what we have to work with.”

The Victim

From Worcester to Pretoria is a two-day drive—16 hours, more or less. Marjorie Jobson has arranged for Olga Ma cingwane and three other residents of Zwelethemba to rent a car and drive up for the constitutional court hearing on November 10, 2009. The four of them agree to meet Stefaans Coetzee the day before the hearing, but only on the condition that they are not doing so to forgive him. “I am not there to forgive him,” Macingwane says firmly. “I am there to face the man in my head. I want to hear what he has to say for himself. But no, I am not there to forgive him.”

Life became difficult for Olga Macingwane after the bombing, and not only for all the obvious reasons. Cadres of the ANC used the funerals for political posturing, racing disabled survivors of the attack through the streets in their wheelchairs, all the while chanting songs made popular during the struggle. Then in 2003 Macingwane’s husband died, and without his support, she could no longer afford to raise their three children. They were sent away to live with relatives. A laminated photograph of Ma cingwane’s husband reveals the exact match you would pick for Olga. He stands before a 1970s polished yellow Datsun in a three-piece suit exuding an aura of conservative reserve. The yellow car is still parked outside Macingwane’s house, dormant under a thick gray blanket.

November 9 is a hot day. Macingwane and the other three residents of Zwelethemba—including Harris Sibeko, husband of the deputy mayor at the time of the attack—walk into the social worker’s office at Pretoria Central and see Coetzee standing in the corner in his orange jumpsuit stamped with the word “prisoner.” “I was shocked,” Macingwane says later. “What I see is a boy. Not the man I have had in my mind all these years, but a boy. What is this boy doing here? How did it happen? That is what is inside my head all of a sudden.”

Macingwane asks to begin with a prayer. In the ensuing silence she gets to her knees—laboriously, because two days in a rental car have done nothing to help the pain in her legs—and begins to pray in Xhosa. She praises God for his hallowedness. She thanks God for bringing South Africa another day. She asks God to forgive her trespasses, as she will forgive others their trespasses against her. She asks God to see that his will be done in this room today. Then she takes her seat. While her colleagues mop their brows and fan themselves against the heat, Macingwane maintains her composure.

The meeting takes place in a mixture of Xhosa, Afrikaans, and English. Macingwane is mostly silent. “He must explain himself before I speak,” she says at the outset.

Coetzee does not talk about his childhood. He speaks about the planning that went into the bombing, how he was chosen for his excellent military skills, the years he has spent in prison. He asks for their questions, and the group responds. How did he learn to hate black people? How did he unlearn this hatred? How does he spend his days now? Is he sorry? And if he is so sorry, what can he give them? Coetzee admits he has nothing material to give the world except the leather belt that holds up his overalls. But, he says, God willing, if he gets out of jail, he can begin to attempt to compensate for what he has done. “There are children now in South Africa,” he says, “children without parents. They might be tempted to get into violent gangs, to follow anger instead of love.” He says, “I can show them that the first life you have to change is your own.”

When Coetzee is asked about the dreams he has for his future, he says he would like to get married. He says he will have to tell his future wife and any children he may have that he is a murderer.

Now Harris Sibeko intervenes. “Listen here, chief, you must wait until a child is old enough to understand what you are telling them, otherwise the child will hate you.” Sibeko turns to the group and asks, “Do you really think we can call this young man a murderer? What do you think is a better name for him?” Then Sibeko answers his own question. “I think you should be called a military operative. Yes, that would be better.”

The group agrees with Sibeko. Then Sibeko asks Coetzee whether he receives any visitors in jail. Coetzee replies that one former prisoner comes sometimes. Sibeko is shocked. “None of your family visit you?” Coetzee replies, “No.”

The interview goes on for two hours. Finally, Olga Macingwane gets to her feet. Unusually, she is fighting with her emotions. She says, “Stefaans, when I see you, I see my sister’s son in you, and I cannot hate you.” She extends her arms. “Come here, boy,” she says in Xhosa. Coetzee walks into her embrace. “I forgive you,” Macingwane says softly. “I have heard what you said, and I forgive you.”

The Law

On that day Daniel Stephanus Coetzee became the only one of the 120 political prisoners eligible for presidential pardon to meet with his victims. The next day, November 10, the Constitutional Court of South Africa, with four new judges appointed by President Zuma, convenes. The first order of business is to hear arguments about whether or not the president should be allowed to pardon any of the political prisoners without a hearing for their victims. Zuma’s attorney argues for unfettered pardoning powers. The attorney representing one of the prisoners also argues for such powers. But an attorney for the human rights groups urges that no political criminals be pardoned without the victims of those crimes being heard. (On February 23, 2010, the constitutional court ruled in favor of the victims.)

Present in the court are some three dozen victims of political crimes involving any number of perpetrators. Several of the victims are wearing T-shirts that read, “No reconciliation without truth, reparation, redress.” Among them is Olga Macingwane.

“I forgive him, but that does not mean I pardon him,” Macingwane tells me afterward. “We are a country of laws now. We are a country who respects the voices of all people. It is up to the laws of my country to decide whether or not to pardon Stefaans.”

For too long, separation and suspicion were mandated by South African law. Now the country’s constitution upholds the dignity and equality of all people, but its power is only as potent as the people’s willingness to live by it. On January 23, 2010—as long envisioned by minister Deon Snyman—representatives of Worcester and of Zwelethemba township gather in Worcester’s Dutch Reformed Church. Across the road in a wide, shady park lies a tiny memorial to the four people killed in the 1996 bombing. The proceedings begin with a prayer. Then Macingwane and Sibeko talk about their journey to Pretoria, their meeting with Coetzee, their forgiveness of him. Restitution is discussed—a youth center and a job-creation center are two ideas. The group agrees to invite Coetzee to a church service in Worcester if the prison authorities will allow it. The date for another meeting is set. Olga Macingwane is elected to the steering committee, which will oversee the restitution process in the months and years to come.

“When I forgave Stefaans,” Macingwane says, “that label of ‘victim’ no longer had such power for me. Physically, of course, the pain will always be there. Mentally, I have at last found some peace. I am not Olga the victim. Now I am Olga. I am Mrs. Olga Macingwane.” 

The Power of the Holy Spirit

This is a powerful and incredible story of a missionaries faith and trust in God, and the power of the Holy Spirit to intervene:

Ready Yourselves

By dorsey
I write this in no way to boast about myself or to receive any praise. My intent is to share of God’s great and awesome grace, mercy, and power, and to give Him all the glory. It amazes me how He chooses to love, protect and dwell with and in us even though we are so imperfect and fall way short of his glory. As his child, I desire to get closer to him and I try to consistently read his word and talk with him throughout the day. I seek his wisdom, understanding, discernment and sound judgment each day, because without it I would make even more mistakes than I do already. We all, as believers, know that there is a battle between our natural nature and our spiritual nature. There is a constant struggle to choose the way of our flesh or the way of God. We must be aware of this war and consciously fight it by filling our minds with his truth. If we commit ourselves on a daily basis, as if practicing a sport or a particular skill, our response will become automatic. We will be filled and driven by the spirit, reacting in the spiritual nature. We will be ready in all circumstances. Of course there will be times when we make the wrong moves, but if we remain abiding in him, he will take over during critical moments without hesitation.

June 10, 2010 was the first day of our First Southern Baptist of Scottsdale youth teams mission trip. After working hard all day we spent the evening playing games on the patio. After relaxing enough I went upstairs to go to bed. Shortly after dozing off I was awakened by Julie, unusually anxious and concerned. She explained that there were men on the patio with guns. Not really sure what was going on, I jumped to my feet, fumbled with the phones that Julie put in my hands, and walked across the house to the top of the stairs. Bewildered, I looked down and saw a masked man at the bottom. Without fear, I boldly and confidently descended the stairs toward him. He backed away and retreated out of the house. When I exited after him I was met by another masked man pointing a shotgun at my chest. I noticed the group, sitting in a circle, heads down, some crying, others stunned. I was forced to sit. One man went through the house collecting valuables while the other held us hostage at gunpoint. The potential for this to get worse was too great and this had to be stopped now. I immediately confronted the masked gunman and rebuked him with authority in the name of Jesus. After a few minutes he responded, “I didn’t know you were Christians.” The power of the name of Jesus was breaking him. He was intimidated by the spirit of God. Sensing this, without fear, I stood up and got in his face, pressing him even harder with Gods truth. With the shotgun at my chest we conversed for some time about Jesus, forgiveness, salvation and the power of God to change lives. He backed down, both physically and spiritually. His heart was softened, open, and remorseful. It was clear that these two men had walked into something that they didn’t expect. They came to instill fear. They thought that they were in control. However, that wasn’t the case. They must have thought “this isn’t how this is supposed to go”. It was clear that God was in control, and I was not afraid, and they knew it. They were the fearful ones. One man was fearing me and calling for me to be shot and killed, the other was fearing God and asking for forgiveness. One ran away. The other stayed to be prayed for, shook my hand and walked off, no doubt, in deep thought.

It is difficult to put into words the awe, the wonder, the amazement, the gratitude, the elation and the faith that followed such a monumental display of Gods presence. God knew exactly what I needed and he gave it to me. He took over and directed every move. There could not have been a more perfect ending. The name of the lord is our strong tower, our deliverer, our defender. He is always there. Jesus you are so good to us!

“Where does my help come from? My help comes from the Lord, the maker of Heaven and earth.” Psalm 121:1-2

Filed in: Founders’ Blog • Wednesday, June 23rd, 2010

How Memory Works

This is a fascinating excerpt that points out many interesting points. My 2 favorite being 1. Our memories are tied to our emotions and 2. Our memory in influenced by many factors including bias, perceptions, and even words such as smash v. hit…
“Many people wish their memory worked like a video recording. How handy would that be? Finding your car keys would simply be a matter of zipping back to the last time you had them and hitting ‘play.’ You would never miss an appointment or forget to pay a bill. You would remember everyone’s birthday. You would ace every exam. Or so you might think. In fact, a memory like that would snare mostly useless data and mix them willy-nilly with the information you really needed. It would not let you prioritize or create the links between events that give them meaning. For the very few people who have true photographic recall – eidetic memory, in the parlance of the field – it is more burden than blessing. “For most of us, memory is not like a video recording – or a notebook, a photograph, a hard drive or any of the other common storage devices to which it has been compared. It is much more like a web of connections between people and things. Indeed, recent research has shown that some people who lose their memory also lose the ability to connect things to each other in their mind. And it is the connections that let us understand cause and effect, learn from our mistakes and anticipate the future. … “Learning and memory are not sequestered in their own storage banks but are distributed across the entire cerebral cortex. … The significance of these findings is profound. It means that memory is dispersed, forming in the regions of the brain responsible for language, vision, hearing, emotion and other functions. It means that learning and memory arise from changes in neurons as they connect to and communicate with other neurons. And it means that a small reminder can reactivate a network of neurons wired together in the course of registering an event, allowing you to experience the event anew. Remembering is reliving. … “The hippocampus [is] an essential mediator in [connecting neurons]. In a very small brain, every neuron might be connected to every other neuron. But a human brain that worked on this model would require that each of hundreds of billions of neurons be linked to every other neuron, an impossibly unwieldy configuration. The hippocampus solves this problem by serving as a kind of neural switchboard, connecting the distant cortical regions for language, vision and other abilities as synaptic networks take shape and create memories “[People with hippocampus damage] appear to have impairments that go well beyond the loss of memory creation. They also have severe difficulty imagining future events, living instead in a fragmented, disconnected reality. Recent studies show that imagining the future involves brain processes similar to, but distinct from, those involved in conjuring the past. We also tend to remember the people and events that resonate emotionally, which is why forgetting an anniversary is such an offense: it is fair evidence that the date is not as important as the ones we do remember. The discovery that memory is all about connections has revolutionary implications for education. It means that memory is integral to thought and that nothing we learn can stand in isolation; we sustain new learning only to the degree we can relate it to what we already know. … “The connections across the brain also help us conceive the future, as recent imaging studies have shown. Functional magnetic resonance imaging … shows that a mosaic of brain areas similar to those involved in memory is active when participants imagine details of hypothetical or prospective events. … “[This] can sometimes cause us problems by altering our memories instead of augmenting them. … Psychologist Elizabeth Loftus [has shown] how easy it is to create false memories of past events. In one study, participants watched a film of a car accident. Researchers asked some subjects how fast they thought the cars were going when they ‘smashed into’ each other and asked other subjects how fast the cars were going when they ‘hit’ each other. The subjects who heard the word ‘smashed’ gave significantly higher estimates of the speed. In other experiments, subjects were fed incorrect information about an accident after watching the film; they might, for instance, be asked repeatedly whether a traffic light had turned yellow before the collision when in fact the light was green. Many then remembered a yellow light that never existed – which is why eyewitness testimony after police interrogation can be so unreliable.” Author: Anthony J. Greene
Title: “Making Connections”
Publisher: Scientific American Mind
Date: July/August 2010
Pages: 22-29

Accepting Our Belovedness

Time and time again, I have found that men have a hard time accepting love, accepting that they are beloved by God.  I urge all of us to listen to the 4 part lecture/sermons by Brennan Manning that I have posted in the past (just search for them by typing in Brennan Manning into the search area in upper right hand corner of this blog)

It is difficult to tolerate being loved because of the risk inherent in positive emotions: observations from the psychiatrist George Vaillant, who has long been the chief curator of the Harvard Study of Adult Development:

“Vaillant became a kind of godfather to the [new field of ‘positive psychology’], and a champion of its message that psychology can improve ordinary lives, not just treat disease. But in many ways, his role in the movement is as provocateur. Last October, I watched him give a lecture to [positive psychologist Martin] Seligman’s graduate students on the power of positive emotions – awe, love, compassion, gratitude, forgiveness, joy, hope, and trust (or faith). ‘The happiness books say, ‘Try happiness. You’ll like it a lot more than misery’ – which is perfectly true,’ he told them. But why, he asked, do people tell psychologists they’d cross the street to avoid someone who had given them a compliment the previous day?

“In fact, Vaillant went on, positive emotions make us more vulnerable than negative ones. One reason is that they’re future-oriented. Fear and sadness have immediate payoffs – protecting us from attack or attracting resources at times of distress. Gratitude and joy, over time, will yield better health and deeper connections – but in the short term actually put us at risk. That’s because, while negative emotions tend to be insulating, positive emotions expose us to the common elements of rejection and heartbreak.

“To illustrate his point, he told a story about one of his ‘prize’ [Harvard] Study men, a doctor and well-loved husband. ‘On his 70th birthday,’ Vaillant said, ‘when he retired from the faculty of medicine, his wife got hold of his patient list and secretly wrote to many of his longest-running patients, ‘Would you write a letter of appreciation?’ And back came 100 single-spaced, desperately loving letters – often with pictures attached. And she put them in a lovely presentation box covered with Thai silk, and gave it to him.’ Eight years later, Vaillant interviewed the man, who proudly pulled the box down from his shelf. ‘George, I don’t know what you’re going to make of this,’ the man said, as he began to cry, ‘but I’ve never read it.’ ‘It’s very hard,’ Vaillant said, ‘for most of us to tolerate being loved.’

Author: Joshua Wolf Shenk
Title: “What Makes Us Happy?”
Publisher: The Atlantic
Date: June 2009
Pages: 47-48.

Steve Wynn Interview

Short interview with Steve Wynn, Hotelier and Real Estate (For those of you who don’t know who he is, he built the Mirage, Bellagio, Wynn Resort, and Encore, as well as casinos in Macau). If you listen to this interview (short & to the point) and nothing else today, you will be better informed than your neighbor about the state of the union.

http://www.infowars.com/steve-wynn-takes-on-washington/

A friend sent me this message and link. Remember that I am not political by nature, but Steve Wynn very succinctly paints that picture of the future of U.S. healthcare and the state of our union.

Teaching ‘Right’

In today’s excerpt – teaching. Through many years of systematic observation of some of the very best teachers, teacher Doug Lemov has identified forty-nine key techniques that separate the very best teachers from merely good ones. One of these forty-nine techniques he has labeled “Right is Right”:

” ‘Right Is Right’ is about the difference between partially right and all-the-way
right – between pretty good and 100 percent. The job of the teacher is to set a
high standard for correctness: 100 percent. The likelihood is strong that students will stop striving when they hear the word right (or yes or some other proxy), so there’s a real risk to naming as right that which is not truly and completely right. When you sign off and tell a student she is right, she must not be betrayed into thinking she can do something that she cannot.

“Many teachers respond to almost-correct answers their students give in class
by rounding up. That is they’ll affirm the student’s answer and repeat it, adding some detail of their own to make it fully correct even though the student didn’t provide (and may not recognize) the differentiating factor. Imagine a student who’s asked at the beginning of Romeo and Juliet how the Capulets and Montagues get along. ‘They don’t like each other,’ the student might say, in an answer that most teachers would, I hope, want some elaboration on before they called it fully correct. ‘Right,’ the teacher might reply. ‘They don’t like each other, and they have been feuding for generations.’ But of course the student hadn’t included the additional detail. That’s the ’rounding up.’ Sometimes the teacher will even give the student credit for the rounding up as if the student said what he did not and what she merely wished he’d said, as in, ‘Right, what Kiley said was that they don’t like each other and have been feuding. Good work, Kiley.’ Either way, the teacher has set a low standard for correctness and explicitly told the class that they can be right even when they are not. Just as important, she has crowded out students’ own thinking, doing cognitive work that students could do themselves (e.g., ‘So, is this a recent thing? A temporary thing? Who can build on Kiley’s answer?’).

“When answers are almost correct, it’s important to tell students that they’re
almost there, that you like what they’ve done so far, that they’re closing in on
the right answer, that they’ve done some good work or made a great start. You
can repeat a student’s answer back to him so he can listen for what’s missing
and further correct – for example, ‘You said the Capulets and the Montagues
didn’t get along.’ Or you can wait or prod or encourage or cajole in other ways
to tell students what still needs doing, ask who can help get the class all the
way there until you get students all the way to a version of right that’s rigorous
enough to be college prep: ‘Kiley, you said the Capulets and the Montagues
didn’t get along. Does that really capture their relationship? Does that sound like what they’d say about each other?’

“In holding out for right, you set the expectation that the questions you ask and their answers truly matter. You show that you believe your students are capable of getting answers as right as students anywhere else. You show the difference between the facile and the scholarly. This faith in the quality of a right answersends a powerful message to your students that will guide them long after they have left your classroom.

“Over the years I’ve witnessed teachers struggle to defend right answers.
In one visit to a fifth-grade classroom, a teacher asked her students to define
peninsula. One student raised his hand and offered this definition: ‘It’s like, where the water indents into the land.’ ‘Right,’ his teacher replied, trying to reinforce participation since so few hands had gone up. Then she added, ‘Well, except that a peninsula is where land indents into water, which is a little different.’ Her reward to the student for his effort was to provide him with misinformation. A peninsula, he heard, is pretty much ‘where the water indents into the land’ but different on some arcane point he need not really recall. Meanwhile, it’s a safe bet that the students with whom he will compete for a seat in college are not learning to conflate bays and peninsulas.”

Author: Doug Lemov
Title: Teach Like a Champion
Publisher: Jossey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint
Date: Copyright 2010 by John Wiley & Sons
Page: 35-37

Prayer as an aggressive act?

Prayer as an aggressive act?

“Violence and love are not contradictory…[we] must learn of
Calvary’s power. Love. And,[we] must also learn Calvary’s price.
Violence.”-Jack HayfordChist’s sacifice was a violent act of love.

From the time of John the Baptizer until now, the kingdom of heaven
has been forcefully advancing, and forceful people have been seizing
it. (Mat 11:12 GW)

This continues to be a strange and new concept for me. I have always
seen prayer as a passive, afterthought. But prayer, like Christ’s
sacrifice for us, is an aggressive act against the evil and darkness
of this world that wants to steal our hearts.