Good news/bad news

Good News – Bad News

In George Orwell’s anti-utopian novel 1984, the inhabitants of Oceana are relentlessly exposed to the changing of their language. Instead of English, there is Newspeak; no longer is there a need for words like “horrible, awful, terrible, hideous,” and the like; “doubleplusungood” will suffice. Part of the influence of Newspeak on Oceana is seen in the use of Doublethink, especially in the threefold motto “War is Peace—Love is Hate—Freedom is Slavery“

Orwell wrote his novel at a time when at least half the world had a totalitarian regime, where every word allowed for public consumption was controlled by the government. We, however, live in a country where the press is free from such control. In a bit of remarkable irony, it is now the press who engages in newspeak and doublethink by continuously perpetrating the motto “Bad News is Good News.”

As we read the headlines from the Associated Press regarding Iraq, it is a nonstop barrage of bad news. Roadside bombs kill three US Soldiers. or US death toll now approaching 2000. Readers might never know that anything good was happening in Iraq. It would be as if someone would only read in the papers that lots of people get murdered in Detroit, therefore it must be unsafe to live in the war zone known as southeast Michigan.

Why does the press continue to report all the bad “news that’s fit to print?” Simply put, bad news will cause an erosion of America’s support for the war, and an erosion of support for President Bush’s policy. So a few thousand aging, burned-out hippies and liberal collegiates converged on the capital this weekend, and it makes headlines. The majority of supporters of the troops are too busy leading productive lives, raising families, helping hurricane victims, volunteering in their church and community, and contributing to a bustling economy and paying taxes.

Test the “bad news is good news” theory elsewhere. When hurricane Katrina hit, every death, every mistake was painted as though it were Bush’s fault, or that he didn’t care, or that he was racist. Or take economic news. Nationwide, the economy is in great shape. Unemployment is (pre-Katrina) at a lower level than at any time during the Clinton presidency. The economy is growing at a rate of 3.3%, a much healthier rate than that of any other country in the world. Inflation is in check. But the only economic news anyone hears is that gas prices are going through the roof, so Bush’s policies are a miserable failure.

It is really pathetic that the media will put the political gain of the democratic party ahead of the country’s good. That’s what happens when you actually hope for bad news—you hope for American casualties in Iraq, you hope for chaos in New Orleans, you hope for people to lose their jobs—all because you want people to blame Bush, and if they do, then there will be a change of political power and just maybe, we’ll be looking at another Clinton presidency in 2008.

Good news is bad news? Sounds a lot like Satan to me. The good news of Jesus’ victory over sin and death, announced and proclaimed by his resurrection and joyfully celebrated each week by believers everywhere, is really bad news for Satan. That’s why he tries to distort it and attack it and undermine it wherever and whenever he can. It's why he convinces so many people that to become a Christian means that you give up all fun, become self-righteous and judgmental, instead of enjoying the freedom and peace of forgiveness of sins in Christ.

Look for other examples of Bad news = good news in the media and include them in your comments this week.

Women's issues

The federal republic of Germany held its national elections over the weekend. Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, an outspoken critic of the United States and of the war in Iraq, was defeated in his re-election bid by Angela Merkel and the Christian Democrats. It remains to be seen whether this change of power will lead to a resumption of the former close relationship enjoyed between the US and Germany. It is also too soon to tell whether this will be the first time that Germany will have a female leader. In an article leading up to the election, Spiegel magazine discussed how Merkel had “discovered” women’s issues. In this case, “women’s issues” means, essentially, government-subsidized child care.

Across the world, elections were taking place in another nation with rather limited experience with democratic government—Afghanistan. “Women’s issues” in Afghanistan—a land only 4 years removed from domination by the Taliban—are defined somewhat differently. Basic human rights issues like education for young girls or the right to appear in public in clothing other than the burka have been implemented. Voting rights are now guaranteed. And in another country liberated from oppression through the sacrifice of US troops, Iraq is getting ready to vote next month on its proposed constitution. Although the country is largely Islamic, women will be guaranteed the right to vote. Even in Saudi Arabia, progress is being made on these basic “women’s issues.”

In our country, when politicians discuss “women’s issues,” it can only mean one thing. Last week, the Senate Judiciary committee held hearings on the nomination of Judge John Roberts to the position of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. What was the number one issue for which the Democratic Senators pressed Judge Roberts for an answer? Abortion. Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) even claimed that she, being the only woman on the committee, was the only one who really had the moral authority to demand to know whether, if confirmed, a Justice Roberts would overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion in the US by declaring all state law prohibiting it to be unconstitutional. How can abortion be considered a “Woman’s issue?” Only by claiming that the right to an abortion is a right for a woman to choose what she does with her own body.

In history, we have learned that the Code of Hammurabi, the oldest written law code, considered women a protected class, not one which was fair game for abuse or oppression. In the Bible, it is worth noting that the wife (woman) of noble character of Proverbs 31 is industrious, even operating her own business. Jesus included many women among his followers and disciples, even if he did not designate them as apostles. Women were partners in the ministry of the Gospel, even if they were not permitted to exercise authority over men in the congregation. As the book of Galatians puts it, “there is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

Several months ago, Lawrence Sumners, the president of Harvard came under fire for even suggesting that a study should be done to see if there are some differences between men and women which would lead to the undeniable statistics that, in general, more men choose to study math and science than women do. How politically incorrect, to say that there are differences between men and women! Why then, do the same feminists demand women’s studies and gender studies at the university and behave as though men have no say on the issue of abortion?

Martin Luther King, Jr., in his famous speech, declared "I have a dream that one day a man will be judged by the content of his character and not by the color of his skin." It is to be hoped that one day we will also not have to distinguish “women’s issues” from “men’s issues,” but only discuss those issues that pertain to all.

Leadership

On Saturday, I attended my first day of classes at UM-Flint in preparation for a Master of Public Administration degree. One class I’m taking is called “The Principalship.” Our instructor is a retired educator with over thirty years of experience as a principal and superintendent of schools. He made a big point of stressing that school leadership is a “messy business” in many ways. Sometimes being a leader means having to confront and remove a poor teacher, or to stand firm in support of a teacher being unfairly criticized by the community. Our textbook also begins by stressing that the best quality of a principal is moral leadership, namely, having the heart, head, and hands for the job. The leader needs to have the heart—caring concern and will; the head—the knowledge and intellect; the hands—the practical skill to do what is necessary, even if it is distasteful.

The other course is called “Introduction to Policy and Public Administration.” The head of the program also discussed the nature of effective leadership by using the Hurricane Katrina disaster as an example. He had heard that the New Mexico contingent of the National Guard was ready to be deployed, was on site, but nobody gave them the order to go in and help. His point is that sometimes a leader has to have the courage to do what is necessary in a crisis, even if it means violating some protocol or chain of command.

As I write this, the country is honoring the memory of those who perished in the attacks now known simply as 9-11. Four years ago, the reeling country looked with admiration on the courage and leadership showed by President Bush and New York mayor Rudy Giuliani. But with the past two weeks, it seems as though anyone in a leadership capacity—New Orleans’ mayor, Louisiana’s governor, and President Bush are all under fire for a lack of courageous leadership. What seems to be a big difference is the performance of the local government officials. The city had a plan to evacuate all of the poor who owned no means of transportation by using city transit busses and school busses—but the mayor seemed to freeze, and the pictures of hundreds of busses under four feet of water are the evidence of a paralysis of leadership. Only the governor can call the National Guard to be deployed, but she did not do so. However, when the Red Cross and Salvation Army wanted to rush to provide food and water to the survivors stranded in the Superdome, the state homeland security department refused--all because they didn’t want people to get the idea that they could stay in the Superdome. One can only guess at this point how many casualties there will be as a result of such paralysis of leadership.

Leaders are, for better or worse, held accountable for the performance of their subordinates. Think of how many head coaches have been fired due to the performance of their teams. Did the coach go out there and throw the interception or miss the free throw? Or how many battles have been lost, not due to the poor planning or deployment by the commander, but because some lieutenant on a hill somewhere froze or lost heart and failed to execute his orders? At the battle of Gettysburg, the pivotal battle in this country’s pivotal war, the colonel who led the 20th Maine,Joshua Chamberlain, held the flank on Little Round Top even after exhausting the supply of ammunition. Had a less courageous leader been in place, the battle and the war might have gone completely differently.

Let’s say that a tornado warning was sounded in our school. We have an emergency plan. We drill it. But let’s say that, when the tornado struck, a teacher didn’t hear the warning because the students were acting noisily, or perhaps the teacher thought it was just a drill and decided to ignore it because there was too much material left to cover in that day’s lesson. If all those children died when the tornado struck, who would be held accountable? Of course, the teacher—but so would the principal. It may seem unfair, but part of leadership means to make sure that your staff takes these issues seriously and can act properly and with courage in a real crisis.

The Bible tells us “Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account.(Hebrews 13:17)” We are also commanded to offer "requests, prayers, intercessions and thanksgiving for kings and all those in authority, that we might live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness (I Timothy 2:1-2)” How has your verbal treatment of your leaders been? Some find it their favorite pastime—to criticize the President, to complain about their principal and his enforcement of the rules, to blame all the problems in a church on the pastor. Some students take the same approach in their criticism of their student council and class officers. But leadership is a lonely position. Let’s try to hold each other accountable and whenever we hear a complaint about a leader, be ready to offer a prayer and a word of encouragement.

Hurricane Katrina

Hurricane Katrina

In the past week, our country has experienced what some are calling the worst natural disaster in the last 100 years, if not in our entire history. The San Francisco Earthquake of 1906 and the Galveston hurricane of 1900 caused incredible damage and death; Katrina’s devastation may be worse, it just is too soon to assess the loss of life and property yet. Due to the efforts of news reporters on-site soon after Katrina passed, almost all Americans were able to instantly see the destruction and hear the desperation in the victims’ voices.

After the 9-11-2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, there were many analysts who chose to assign blame for them on the United States itself. Incredible as it may seem, some people said that the US was getting what it deserved because of its imperialism, its support of Israel, and adventurous foreign policy. Even well-known Christian broadcasters seemed to be of the opinion that America had been guilty of offending God with its tolerance of the evils of abortion and homosexuality, and needed this attack as a call to repentance.

In the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, many similar theories are being advanced. From the lips of prominent Al-Qaeda leaders we hear that Katrina was Allah’s punishment on the US for its mission in Afghanistan and Iraq. (What would you expect—except that the same leaders were blaming their fellow Muslims in Indonesia for somehow displeasing Allah and bringing upon themselves the tsunami disaster on Christmas 2004). People are distressed at the lack of speed being shown by the rescue teams. And, quite frankly, it is heartbreaking to hear the desperate pleas of those in need of food and water, to be harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. The resulting blame game has been just as distressing, as the “blame Bush for everything” crowd revs up its engines and makes absurd accusations that the administration is responsible for the tragedy because they wouldn’t sign the Kyoto protocols against “global warming” or because they wouldn’t invest money to make the levees safe against a Category 5 storm, or even because they wanted the oil companies to make more money, or that they are racist and don’t care about the African-Americans who are in dire need.

Ever since the days of Job, the pious believer in God’s grace and providence has asked why misfortune, disaster, and evil things befall the righteous. Could God have actually directed this storm at New Orleans because of their rowdy celebrations of Mardi Gras, and the libertine abuse of alcohol and displays of sexuality that accompany that prelude to Lent? Could God have wiped out the communities of Gulfport and Biloxi because of the casinos and the attendant wastefulness of resources, greed, and corruption that go hand in hand with them? And what about the individual Christian who suffers? We all expect to die, but is God being just and fair to take the life of a person who isn’t old and who still has kids at home to raise?

Let’s take a look at a couple of passages from the New Testament. In Luke 13:1-4, we read,

“Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. Jesus answered, ‘Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you, too, will perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower of Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”

All sinful people will die; that is the wages of sin. But the death of these 18 souls should not be seen as evidence that they were somehow more guilty or more deserving of death than any other sinners. Their premature and sudden death serves as a reminder to all sinners of the need to repent, for no one knows the day or the hour that our own summons may come.

In John 9:1-3, we read,

“As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’ ‘Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, ‘but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life.’”

Of course, the man and his parents were sinners, but what Jesus was saying is that you could not attribute his blindness to a specific sin; it was not a logical consequence of any choice of bad behavior. Instead, this was an occasion for the work of God to be displayed in his life. And Jesus proceeded to heal him of his blindness, bringing that glory to God through his Son, Jesus Christ.

What does this have to do with the disaster known as hurricane Katrina? This is an opportunity for the people of God to glorify Him, with a generous outpouring of love and charity, of compassion for our neighbor. Certainly financial donations are the easiest way to accomplish the most good. I might have an old toaster I could give away, but if I give ten dollars it might buy a 30 gallons of bottled water, which is a far greater priority. But many of these families are going to be permanently displaced. They will need some place to live other than in a shelter. The kids need to be in school. The adults need to find meaningful work. There may be an opportunity for Christian churches to sponsor refugees, finding them a place to live, to learn, to earn, and, above all, for God to be glorified in their lives. The response of a Christian to the needs of others is not “Whose fault?” but rather “Where can I help?”

Use the comment sections to share what you have heard about the hurricane relief efforts, either sharing stories of survivors, of heroic efforts, or of opportunities to help.