Who Can Save This World A Visit With My Japanese Sisters In Japan

by Betsy Orman-Fargo, ND

It's amazing how God prepares things in advance of our finding them. We sometimes stumble into events and then realize how God has been working and everything is just waiting for our correct response. This was clearly shown to me at the WFWP Conferences in Washington D.C.

At the International Friendship Conference I attended in Washington I was matched with a beautiful sister, Mrs. Ota. She was a little older than myself but when I looked into her eyes I felt our spirit was the same. We really felt like sisters. I hated to leave her when the conference was over and felt I should attend the next conference as well. Then I was given another wonderful sister, Mrs. Cheiko Atago. As I was waiting to be matched to Cheiko I was asked to give up my seat to someone else who was assigned to that seat. That guest never came and finally the usher grabbed me from across the room and asked me to sit down next to Cheiko who now had no American match. I had prayed a simple prayer while waiting to meet my Japanese sister that day. "Heavenly Father please send someone to me whom I can help."

Five days after returning to my home in North Dakota I received a telephone call. It was early Saturday morning and I was dreaming about an earthquake. The earth was shaking and I was standing on top of it watching it move all over. The phone rang and Mrs. Atago was on the other end. She asked me to come to Japan to speak to her WFWP organization there. She was having a meeting in ten days and said she would send an airplane ticket if I could attend. She was trying to explain to her WFWP organization the value of the conference and wanted to show them the sister she had been given in America.

When I told my husband he was so inspired and with his support and the help of Keiko Foss interpreting my fax's and phone calls and Cindy Pfieffers babysitting and prayer I was off to Japan. Mrs. Atago lived in Toyama, her hometown. It's a beautiful city under the most impressive mountains. It was very cold like North Dakota and filled with small farms, similar to our state, but our small farms are huge in comparison.

As the Atagos worked furiously to prepare for the upcoming conference I did what I could to help. Unable to speak Japanese I got inspired to clean and organize their house. Being away from my responsibilities at home I could spend all my time serving her family and praying for the conference. For me it was like heaven having a chance to pray so much. I felt Gods love pouring down for the people of Japan.

When the day of the conference arrived I met my interpreter and her husband who coincidentally had worked for several years in North Dakota. I read a letter of recognition of this International conference from my Senator who had met with our delegation when we visited Washington D.C. He was moved by the ideals of our organization. As I spoke I felt True Parents love fill me up as though they were right there giving the speech. I then found out that True Parents could not speak in Japan at this time, so I understood why I felt their spirit come and surround me wherever I went.

When I spoke at the church center to the members I went into the prayer room and as I looked at True Parents picture I saw tears flowing down Mothers face as she worried about our members situation in Japan. Wherever I spoke I felt God just tried to love and uplift the people and help them solve the difficult situations which they face daily.

One of the most challenging situations our members deal with is the negativity that has surrounded our movement in Japan since the blessing. Also because of the bombing of the Tokyo subway by a religious cult the T.V. there has continuously filled the airwaves with negativity about religious movements. This heavy battle has put a tremendous strain on our members. I believe Americans have the power to help change this negativity.

In Toyama the WFWP Chairwoman (who is not a member of our church) was deeply moved by my speech and asked that I come meet her husband. She had tried to explain to him the value of WFWP for some time. He was very busy running his construction business and did not have time to find out about our movement. Because I was American he took time from his busy schedule to meet with me, although our church leaders in Toyama had tried to meet him for over one year. We shared deeply about his business and I spoke to him about the tunnel project Father had initiated in Asia. He was very impressed. We went on to talk about fishing, golf and grandchildren. I invited he and his wife to come visit us in North Dakota, where my father- in - law has a home on lake and we could take him fishing and our cousin owns a golf course. We are working out a plan for this now including a one day blessing workshop.

What impressed me most during my visit was the tremendous sacrifice our members in Japan are making for America. They are under a great financial burden to support many of our movements programs. They live humbly sacrificing everything for America in the hope that America will lead the world back to God. I felt shame for my lack of determination to fulfill this goal at the expense of the lives of our Japanese members. In America we have been given everything by True Parents, especially their love. Japan could flourish if they were able to receive this directly. We, as a nation have tremendous power to influence the east. If we in some way take responsibility to turn this nation around the east will follow us to heaven instead of hell. I repented on the plane as I headed for my next destination Tokyo, to visit my other sister Mrs. Ota. What had God prepared for me there?

Mrs. Ota greeted me with tears when we met at the airport. A day later I realized why she was awaiting my coming with such love. In order to pay for her trip to Washington she decided to sell her home, a home she had lived in for thirty years, and raised her family in. In Tokyo a new home is almost impossible to find because of the lack of land. Homes are passed down through generations. On the day I called to tell her I was coming to Japan, her house was sold. She felt Gods blessing was coming through my visit.

We went out to dinner that evening with her children and an interpreter and shared about life in our two countries. When I shared about my experiences serving True Parents or the True Children, working with Dr. Pak and Mr. Fujii she was shocked. In Japan our movement has over 50,000 members. Dr. Pak is now leading our movement there and Mr. Fujii was formally President of the Japanese church. Mrs. Ota was amazed that I knew them personally and had worked with them..

The following day Dr. Pak was to speak to over 2000 people about our movement at a nearby hotel in Tokyo. As soon as we arrived Mrs. Ota went up to someone in charge and told them I wanted to greet Dr. Pak. He whisked us off to Dr. Pak's room where I was able to give Dr. Pak a report about our victory in Toyama and a meeting our WFWP members had in Washington with some very important members of congress. I happened to have video taped both and gave him a copy. He was moved that I wanted to report to him. I knew much of the victory in Washington was due to the tremendous effort Dr. Pak had made while working there so many years. As I introduced Mrs. Ota to him she could barely look up, as though she were meeting the Emperor of Japan. And here in America I had the blessing to be able to work with Dr. Pak so closely.

This meeting was for guests. When the meeting began the atmosphere was very cool. Dr. Pak used slides to share about the work that has been done throughout our movement, most of which was done in America. Although the speech was in Japanese almost every sentence included the word America. Not having worked in Japan I didn't realize how much of True Parents investment was made in America. Through watching Dr. Pak's presentation it struck me so deeply. How much God has sacrificed everything to raise up America, so America could lead the world. By the end of the speech even the biggest skeptics were in tears. I was sitting next to one whose wife dragged him to the program. By the end he was filling out request forms for more information about our movement.

As I looked up I caught the eyes of Mr. Fujii who was sitting a couple of rows away. He couldn't figure out what I was doing in Japan. I introduced Mrs. Ota, who was amazed that Mr. Fujii would come over to greet us. He asked us out to lunch and he shared with Mrs. Ota for about three hours about her life of faith. While working in America Mr. Fujii is the leader that taught me faith, he brought such a deep understanding of Gods love to me. Before I left for Japan my husband suggested that I call Mr. Fujii and meet with him, but I thought surely Mr. Fujii would be too busy and dismissed the idea. God had already prepared this meeting.

Afterward we went to his home and I met four of his seven children. I shared all about how the Fujiis sacrificed their own children to take care of the American members. I felt finally I could impart to their children the gratitude and love I had for their parents. Most of the family longed to be back in America with it's wide open spaces. Mrs. Ota was melted to see how much we were like Father and Daughter. For her is was like a dream come true to have received such love from these two leaders directly.

When I spoke in our Church in Toyama the week before, I asked how many members had spent time with True Parents or had some kind of personal relationship with them. Only two raised their hands. Our membership in America have seen True Parents so many times. But in Japan it's difficult for the members to feel like the children of True Parents because they have so few direct experiences with them. Also because Japans religious foundation is Buddhist rather than Judeo-Christian the relationship our members have to God is more one of obedience rather than parental love.

As I look back on my experience I felt to give the love of True Parents was the reason I was sent there. God sent me two of the most sincere sisters to share this with. And God gave me so much understanding of the power America holds in her hand and how we have to use it for goodness..

All the love and investment God has made into this nation is not for America but for the world. Each member here must take a leadership role in their community and turn that area toward God. God has allowed True Parents to stay in America and work even though he is worried about so many other nations.

I urge all sisters to attend the Washington conferences. The more women attend, I believe, the more quickly world peace will be achieved. Once you return please do all you can to help your Japanese sisters, especially go visit Japan if possible. It gave me such a different perspective of our mission in America. Through the unity of our families I know we are building a bridge of love that will never be broken. I never really understood the importance of my mission here in America until my Japanese sisters showed me through their love and sacrifice.

What Messages Are We Getting From TV?

by Haven Bradford Gow

An article in the February 1995 issue of Movieguide, the publication of the Christian Film & TV Commission (Box 190010, Atlanta, GA 31119), says that in evaluating TV programs and the messages TV writers/producers are communicating to us, we must keep in mind these five questions: "(1) Is it ethical to use communication and marketing strategies to systematically influence societal beliefs and behaviors? (2) Who is best qualified to make the decision about pro-social and anti-social messages in the popular media? (3) Is it ethical to target messages to a particular audience group in exclusion of others? (4) Is it ethical for nations that control the media to export their own cultural values and beliefs? and (5) Should be risk the unintended consequences of media designed to promote social change?"

In his book Taking on Donahue and TV Morality (Questar Publishers, Box 1720, Sisters, OR), Dr. Richard Neill, a dentist and a concerned parent, explains why he was upset and alarmed about the messages communicated by the Phil Donahue talk show, and why he started contacting advertisers and other concerned parents in an effort to have the Donahue program taken off the air. Dr. Neill wrote to advertisers and concerned parents about such Donahue topics as:

* A young girl engaging in oral sex and intercourse with her father in front of her brother who at the same time was engaging in sex with his mother.

* A mother picking up her daughter's boyfriend from school, taking him home and then engaging in sex with him.

* A married couple exploring the possibility of inviting another couple over to their home for dinner and then for sex.

* A young boy engaging in oral sex with his mother, with erections and intercourse with the mother also discussed.

The March 1995 AFA Journal, Tupelo, MS, also provides examples of morally disturbing messages communicated on some popular TV programs. For example, on the January 8, 1995 episode of Married...with Children (Fox network), series hero Al Bundy and friends use several vulgar slang terms to describe the anatomies of women at the strip joint they frequent. On the January 9 episode of Models (Fox), we once again find on this program illicit sex, selfish ambition, greed, drug abuse and a male prostitute who is a regular character on the show. The January 7 episode of Mommies (NBC) focused on the thrill of teenage boys engaging in sex with their girlfriends while their parents are still in the house. The January 4 episode of Roseanne (ABC) focused on spying on next-door neighbors (who happen to be nudists) and on a teenage girl's sexual relationship with her current boyfriend and former lover.

According to an important new study by Children Now, a child advocacy group with offices in Los Angeles, Sacramento, Oakland, Washington, D.C. and New York City, "Television is sending mixed messages to children...few role models are presented on television to help teach children how to handle the many important social and family problems they face in real life, with surprisingly few shows offering examples of children coping with such problems."

The study also concludes that "the majority of child characters on commercial broadcast networks were shown acting in an anti-social way. Certain significant anti-social behaviors, including physical aggression and deceitful behavior, are frequently shown to be effective in meeting children's goals, sending a potentially negative message to the children in the audience." Moreover, "the children on television are seen most often being motivated by peer relationships and romance, and least often by...religion."

In sharp contrast to the popular TV shows saturated with sex, violence and anti-religious hostility is the Bravo cable TV channel series Brooklyn Bridge, which celebrates and affirms such traditional values as religious faith, decency, and the beauty of good family life and friendship. One of the nicest features of Brooklyn Bridge is the developing friendship of Katie, a young Irish-Catholic girl, and Alan, a young Jewish boy. In one episode, Katie and Alan bring their families together in a Chinese restaurant, where they help them overcome religious and ethnic bigotry and prejudice and see the positive aspects of each other's religious and ethnic identities and teach them to become friends.

Jennifer Lewis, the lovely and graceful young actress who portrays Katie Monahan, communicates-personifies-a wholesomeness and a spiritual beauty, purity and innocence-like watching a lovely ballerina dancing at her very best. When Jennifer smiles, her eyes light up and she radiates an inner grace and beauty. When Jennifer appears in a scene, her eyes glow and she lights up the screen with her grace, charm, dignity, beauty and professionalism.

Jennifer Lewis possesses a purity of heart and soul, and that purity is reflected in the beauty of her eyes and in the graceful way she does and says things. Jennifer has the kind of beauty and purity that causes one to think of Christmas and of Easter and-ultimately-of God. Jennifer's spiritual beauty and purity help people understand that virtue and goodness are lovely and worth pursuing.

Mr. Gow is a columnist who has published more than 1,000 articles and reviews in 100 magazines and newspapers.

What Hunger Insurance Could Teach Us About Health Insurance

by Joseph Bast-Irvington, NY

To understand what lies at the heart of the failure of our current health-care financing system, imagine, if you can, what the world would be like if we tried to buy food the same way we buy health-care services.

You could go to work tomorrow morning and hear your boss tell you the following: the company has decided to offer a new benefit-hunger insurance. The company will purchase a hunger insurance policy for you that covers about 95 percent of your food costs whenever you enter a grocery store or restaurant, and a smaller share of the miscellaneous snacks and condiments you purchase from street vendors and the corner drugstore. To pay for the new benefit, the company will withhold some of your pay-about $100 a week or so.

What effect would hunger insurance have on you, a consumer of food? If you're like me, you will probably start to eat more...and eat better, more expensive foods. Why eat hamburger when you can have tenderloin? Why settler for beer when the finest wines cost you just as little?

If there were such a thing as hunger insurance, some of us would stop checking prices before we ordered food, just as we don't check prices when we ask for medical treatment.

What effect would hunger insurance have on the providers of food? Put yourself in the shoes of a grocery store manager. You would start stocking more caviar and less Cheese Whiz, wouldn't you?

Every grocery store would offer an impressive array of products, from the very finest meat department to the best-stocked liquor counter (providing state law allowed it). That the store next door has the same expensive freezers and wine cellar matters not at all; cost, you understand, is no object. "Over investing in new technology?" you ask. Hey, the insurance company pays for it all! And if we don't offer it, customers will cross the street and shop there. You know you would.

What if you were a lousy grocery store manager who just couldn't keep costs down and quality up? Before hunger insurance came along, you would be forced out of the market by stores managed by sharper people able to cut costs without sacrificing quality. Customers wouldn't patronize your establishment, and you'd be out of business. But with hunger insurance, you can pass along your higher costs to the insurer, so the customer never knows how inefficient you are!

If there were such a thing as hunger insurance, the price of food would begin to soar, just as the price of health services has steadily risen faster than the price of other goods and services.

Inefficient, low-quality providers of food would stay in business rather than be forced out by better competitors, just as high-cost providers of health care are tolerated in today's health-care marketplace.

Some people in our imaginary world will be uninsured: they won't have hunger insurance because their employers are too small to afford to offer this new benefit, or because they are self-employed or unemployed. Or, in their effort to control costs and make money, some hunger insurers will refuse to cover people who are high food-risks- the hoarders, the people with exceptionally delicate palates, and the bulimics. They will offer cheaper rates to others: beer-drinking football fans, people who can't smell, and anorexics.

The uninsured will be hurt the most by hunger insurance because they will see the price of food bid up and out of reach by those lucky enough to have hunger insurance.

Civil rights activists and well-meaning people without much understanding of economics would campaign against for-profit hunger insurers, denouncing them for being heartless in their discrimination against people with eating disorders. They would condemn them for profiting from the provision of something so fundamental to human life as food. "Food is a right, not a privilege," they would say. "The high administrative costs of the hunger insurers are what is causing the problem. We should abolish private hunger insurance companies and replace them with a single provider of food."

And since experience will have so convincingly shown that the current hunger insurance system is inefficient and unjust, our enlightened elected officials would eventually yield to the public's demands and pass "pay or play," forcing business to buy hunger insurance for all their employees, or "national hunger insurance," where government acts as the single payor of all hunger insurance claims.

Commissions will spring up everywhere to determine whether a carrot is more valuable to the community's welfare than a grape, and a grape more valuable than a banana; just as commissions are being created at this very moment to decide whether capping 1,000 teeth is "worth more" than extending a person's life for one week by kidney dialysis. The issue will be addressed as if justice and virtue, rather than economics and incentives, were at the heart of the issue.

What if there were such a thing as hunger insurance? This little exercise in imagination teaches us quite a bit about why we spend too much on health care. In its simplest form, the lesson is that we rely too much on insurance to pay for our health-care expenses. This reliance makes us poor consumers, encourages health care providers to provide too much, and allows and even encourages inefficiency and waste.

The solution to the nation's health care crisis is not, of course, to abolish health insurance. Health expenses are an insurable risk, and because they can be substantial, it certainly makes sense for people to buy insurance. But insurance should not be simply pre-payment for routine medical expenses. When insurance is used for this purpose, it leads to overuse and all the problems we saw with hunger insurance.

Insurance, instead, should be limited to protecting us from what is now called catastrophic risks. We should self-insure against small and routine health expenses, and ask our insurance coverage to "kick in" only for large and unpredicted expenses.

Medical Savings Accounts

We rely so heavily on insurance to pay our medical bills because the tax code rewards employer-paid insurance and penalizes self-insurance. Employer-paid health insurance premiums are tax-deductible business expenses for our employers, so they don't count as taxable income at the end of the year. Money spent paying medical bills directly, in contrast, is not tax-deductible. We must pay out-of-pocket medical expenses with what is left of our paychecks after Uncle Sam has taken his tax share.

The way to correct this situation is to follow the path blazed by Individual Retirement Accounts, or IRAs. IRAs encourage us to put away money for retirement by allowing us to deduct the amount of our contributions from our income when calculating our income taxes. Medical Savings Accounts, or MSAs, would operate the same way, but money deposited into the accounts could be withdrawn only for medical expenses.

By giving the same favorable tax treatment to self-insurance as is now given to employer-paid health insurance, we can begin to break our national addiction to health insurance.

Two organizations have done the work designing MSA plans that are fair and affordable for all Americans. They are the National Center for Policy Analysis, in Dallas, Texas, and the Council for Affordable Health Care, in Washington, D.C. Several bills now pending in Washington, including HR5250, would create MSAs.

MSAs offer the best way to control spending without life-threatening rationing, ineffectual price controls, and all the other nonsolutions being discussed by politicians today.

Our fictitious world with hunger insurance reveals how over-reliance on health insurance is at the very root of our nation's health-care problems. The solution to these problems is not to pass price controls or impose more regulation on health-care providers. All that is required is a change in the tax code encouraging people to pay for their own health care out of personal savings.

Joseph Bast is president of The Heartland Institute in Chicago. This article is excerpted from the November Freeman, the monthly journal of The Foundation for Economic Education, Irvington-on-Hudson, New York. Copyright 1993.

Vote for God-centered Family Values

by Alexa Fish Ward

This is the sermon given at the Unification Theological Seminary Open House Ecumenical Service on Sunday, May 7, 1995

You do not have too look very far today to find a discussion of values, especially family values. Family values mean many things to many people. In the political arena, they are strongly espoused by both the left and the right. In the world of social issues, pro-life and pro-choice camps both lay claim to their commitment to family values. Family values are discussed in schools and debated in the media. One can learn a great deal about family values from all these sources.

There is a place, however, where family values have an actual life of their own, and have a natural constituency. This place is the family. Parents and children are both teachers and students. In this arena, the stakes are high. The classes never end. Actions become more important than words. Traditions are made or broken. Adulthood is made secure or left shaky. The quality of future generations is determined. Mrs. Barbara Bush, the wife of the former president, George Bush, said simply in her memoirs, "What happens in your house is more important than what happens in the White House."

I would like to talk about what happens in our house, not because it is special, but because it is where family values begin, and if there is something in our experience which can help another person, then its value increases.

My husband Tom and I have chosen God-centered values to guide our lives. What are God-centered values? Absolute, public, universal, good for all people, high-standard, to name a few. That description could spark a lot of debate. I sense that something is of God because of its purity, because of the way it touches my heart and challenges something deep inside of me to be better. For Tom and me, as members of the Unification Church, we are deeply grateful to Reverend and Mrs. Sun Myung Moon for their extraordinary contribution in the areas of man's relationship to God and the nature of a God-centered worldview.

How do you teach God-centered values in a family? You have to live them. The values have to touch you deep inside through experience, and gradually become part of you. These experiences need to be served with a heart of love. This is easy to speak of and so very difficult to live. So much of the public debate on family values is done with anger and finger-pointing. That environment does not support growth and maturity.

Tom and I have four children, ages three to ten. They are all coming into the ages where they can begin to understand value-oriented lessons. Over the years we have made a commitment to several values upon which we base our family life. We talk about them often; however, the lessons, begin as each one of us experiences them personally in our lives.

Give and forget the gift is one value we emphasize. Our children seem to spend a great deal of time negotiating, with us and with each other-I did this, therefore you owe me that. So much is conditional in their young lives. From us and in Sunday School they learn that God is giving, always giving. I like the example of nature, every season giving so much, consistently year after year. However, these words alone do not make this value real in their lives. Several years ago we began to participate in the Adopt-A-Family program at Christmastime here in Dutchess County. Through a social service agency, we were given a family to help at Christmas time. We can assist in several ways: 1) purchase and decorate a Christmas tree, 2) purchase and wrap a gift for each family member, and 3) prepare a Christmas dinner for the family. After consulting with the mother, we chose to contribute the gifts. I involved my children in the process of deciding what to get each person, picking out the gifts, and wrapping them. At some point in this process, the question arose: what were they going to give us? Nothing, I answered. This is our turn to give and not get something back. Oh, said a small voice. Hmm, said another. Give and forget the gift.

This past Christmas we were given a family with four children and one parent. From the mother I learned what each child wanted. The toys were expensive. I had only so much money to spend on Christmas, whether it was spent on our family or beyond. I chose to get what our Christmas family wanted. It meant less for our children from us. We talked about it. I told them that these would be the only gifts under our Christmas family's tree, whereas our children receive from many relatives. This past Christmas began to give meaning to Giving sometimes means giving up.

The value of Putting God first is the building block of a God-centered life. It means many things. It takes on many forms. For our younger children, it begins to become real with the simple prayer before meals, and the brief prayer at the beginning of the day. The challenge of that value becomes greater with age. We do not have sleepovers in our home, because we want that time before bed and at the beginning of the day to be between us and God. Putting God first. Our eldest son gave up soccer on Sunday afternoons in order to attend a Sunday School program. Putting God first and Giving sometimes means giving up.

Putting God first is a natural introduction to a public life. One way to put God first is to put other people first. In our house we do what the guest wants to do. That is not always fun or easy. The guest is served first. We try and have other families over so that we can give to them. We stand on the sidewalk and wave until their car is out of sight. Last year I invited women whom I wanted to get to know, over for lunch, one at a time. Rebecca, our only daughter, age 5 at the time, would help me prepare a simple meal and then serve it. She learned how to sit quietly, sometimes, and how to serve others first. I enjoyed those luncheons. I am involved in several activities in the community-the Building Level Team at the local elementary school, a program committee for the Mid-Hudson Children's Museum, and the City of Poughkeepsie Republican Committee. Whines and groans accompany my departures for meetings or lengthy phone calls. I always explain to the children that I am putting God first by helping other people.

One last value I will mention is that of Respecting and cherishing the members of your family. That sounds so obvious. However, my four children spend quite a bit of time fighting, bossing each other around, and trying to have the final word. More than anything else this sends me to my room to read a good book or simply take a deep breath. We talk about this quite a bit. I try to have them do things for each other. The other day I was walking up to our house with our eldest son and he said, with his voice cracking, how bad he felt about not giving his dad a proper good-bye hug before he left for South America last month. In that moment, putting God first which took dad to South America, giving sometimes means giving up, and cherishing your family members all came together in a way that my words could not achieve.

As I was writing this down, I realized how very easy it is to put into words, and how very difficult it is to live. Each one of these examples is worth their weight in god. However, there are many times when my heart and words are not as they should be and I only pray that my own limitations do not get in the way too much.

In closing, I believe that a life committed to living God-centered values is rich and full, the best possible life, with some of the worst possible moments along the way. With a framework of God-centered values, everyday experiences, as well as struggle and hurt, take on meaning and depth, connecting them to the highest purpose. In the great public debate on family values, I cast my vote with God-centered family values.

The Question - Reflections on My Russia Days

by Jonatha A. Johnson

"And what do you think about rich people?"

"Uh...umm...Huh?" I replied, while my mind zeroed in on this unexpected question. Natasha stepped closer as I turned to make eye contact, and she said again, "We want to know what you think about rich people."

"What rich people?" Had I dropped in on a conversation already in progress? Her words now ricocheted s l o w l y between my ears, seeking a place to land.

"All rich men.... Any...." Lyuba, our other translator, came closer and they breathlessly awaited my reply. There I stood defenseless as an actress without a script when the curtain goes up.

We three-Natasha, Lyuba and I-were working in the office together at a modern resort hotel at the Black Sea in Crimea. We served as administrative support staff for the educational seminars for high schoolers on their spring break. These two Russian translators were both English teachers for children in Crimean schools. However, before joining our seminar staff, they had never met a person who spoke English as a native tongue-never! They had learned to speak English from other Russians.

"And how did those other Russians learn English?"

"From books!"

Yes. I was impressed. From day two I had noticed how both women listened closely to my sentences, scribbling little notes while I spoke.

"What are you writing? What did I say?"

"Prepositions," Natasha explained. "We need to understand how a native speaker uses prepositions in conversation."

Gosh. Uh, well.... I had a lot of in's, on's, over's, under's, towards's, by's and through's to give them! Yes! I'll be their native speaker! On this basis of mutual understanding I spoke more carefully, with less grammatical complication. And we put together a makeshift bridge of trust.

It was a few days later, the natural consequence of this trust, that they could ask me such a pivotal question. And really, this question did not know where to land...and it seemed like it was going to hit me right smack on the funnybone. Was this some kind of joke-what did I think of rich people-some kind of trick question? But the sincere look on their faces vaporized my tendency to laugh.

"I...I don't know any."

The texture of the moment told me this was not some formal "exchange of views," but rather a heartfelt sharing among women. As women we would transcend the suspicions and doubts superimposed upon our minds by the political world of men-which is to say, the "Us versus Them" mentality.

But a shadow of a doubt had crept over me. In America, it is considered to be a justifiable moral position to attack the wealth of religious institutions and their founders. This fits conveniently into the historical framework of Protestant reform. It emerges from the Bible verses: "Consider the lilies of the field...." This idea of liberating carefree simplicity becomes the ideal of poverty as virtue- which then becomes convoluted into wealth as evidence of evil. This dubious street logic can then be fired successfully and wickedly at others. It is a giant cannonball in the arsenal of atheists who don't even have any religious principles to draw from. Could this be what Natasha was coming to?

Just then the phone rang and our conversation was left to dangle promisingly. But Natasha had been able to clarify her meaning by saying, "No. Not anyone in particular. Rich people in general-what do you think of them?"

Three months later the exact same Question confronted me in Lithuania, from a completely different person. This time it felt like an old ghost stalking me. My father had died before making his peace with the world. He had served his wartime as a medic, patching up the wounded when possible. Sending them back to fight or home to die. Naples. Okinawa. Wherever. Back when the Soviets were sort of on our side...and there were all those fragrant promises of throwing off the shackles of the oppressed. My father returned home regarded as "a pinko," aligning himself with the poor, hating the rich. This didn't surface often, but it was there: an ideological stuffing giving form to frustration. It was there, collecting dust like stuff in the attic that you forget you have. A trip to the attic brings forth a flood of memories, which may be the necessary and sufficient reason we store the stuff in the first place.

Likewise, the unresolved contradictions that gripped the parent may reappear for the son or daughter to clarify and to clear.

By now a response stirred within, making its way to the surface: "Why do you ask me this question? Is there something I am expected to say? I mean, am I supposed to think about them?"

My Russian inquisitor replied, "I mean to say: `Don't you hate them?'!"

"Oh! Well, if we were to ask this question, we would say, `How do you feel about rich people?' not `What do you think?' But as for me, I don't think about them at all. Why should I bother to like them or hate them? I'm just busy living my life. But, yes, I'm sure you can find someone who hates the rich. Some people do."

Nearly a year passed before The Question came up again. Irina was translating as we toured St. Petersburg in Valery's car. How beautiful the old city looked beneath her coverlet of snow! Not too much snow, but this was February when night arrives early and lingers long. The city fathers had appropriately installed electric lighting to replace the gas lamps all over town. Bridges, city parks, the grounds of museums, cathedrals and historic sites were all gently lit.

Late at night like this, we had the city all to ourselves, and we drove past the massive gates protecting the Winter Palace, past the ancient cemetery where Pushkin lies, past the channel where Lenin's grey battleship used to overturn Holy Russia floats in silence. But Lenin isn't the father here; Peter is.

Valery, Irina and I walk up to the tiny log cabin Peter built, where he proclaimed his intention to build a great fortress city here in the swamp. Here, facing Europe for the wars to come. Here, only ninety miles from Finland, Irina brought out The Question, and we dusted it off.

"And what do you think about rich people?"

By now I knew my audience: the hearts and minds and wounded spirits of all who suffered and died for the "Workers of the World, Unite" ideal. My audience was those for, those against, and all those descendants not a part of that process of history at all.

But who has the tools to express the monumental pain that sustains The Question, breathes life into it from generation to generation? From the Black Sea to Pushkin's grave, to who knows where beyond; goodness knows there's an audience waiting for the key to unlock the great contradictions. The paralyzing thoughts that bind men to their hatreds imprison their hearts, and bring stagnation to families, villages, nations. Standing there beneath the lamp by Peter's cabin, my audience waited.

"Well, that's a little question with a big answer! We all enjoy the results of what rich people do! Just look, here we are riding around St. Petersburg at night in the comfort of your car."

In this simple point I had found my voice. This wasn't about the dialectic of class warfare, or Marxist economic theory, or global geopolitical historical determination gobbledygook-this little conversation was about us.

"As little kids we read about famous Americans, just as you read books about famous Russians. We learn about Thomas Edison and Henry Ford, so I want to use there two as examples, because they each built huge fortunes from something they made. Or maybe because I'm so happy riding around with you. And I'm truly inspired by the beauty of these old-time lamps!

"To get that first electric light bulb to work, Edison had to try many times. Oxygen made the little wire inside burn out too quickly. They tried using a vacuum, but it isn't easy to keep a vacuum going. So, they had to find another gas to put in there. Old Mr. Edison had to keep paying the workers all this time-something like 16 years-whether or not the bulbs worked.

"If you don't pay the workers, the workers will run away. Well, Edison kept all those bulbs-some three thousand of them-and you can go see them. Schoolchildren take trips to go see all those bulbs that didn't work!

"And old Mr. Ford was really a crazy old fox. How could anybody take him seriously? When you have a really big new idea, you have to believe in it all by yourself-and work on it like a fool. Those men weren't so rich to begin with, but they married rich women.

"But those women must have been very special to stay married to a man who spends all his time and all the family money in the back yard working on "ideas". They ended up millionaires because they came up with ideas that worked and benefited millions of people. These men changed the world they lived in, and the world rewarded them; that's how it works.

"Oh, a lot of people think wealth stinks, and the rich get richer by taking something away from somebody else who had it first. Sometimes it happens. Bad things happen on your side of history, on our side, and in the middle. Lots of people hated Henry Ford, too, but we cannot let that poison us, you know?

"We have the advantage of knowing our American history, with many examples of rich people who did good things with their money. Libraries and universities are named for them. And also, our society has this big middle class, where people have some education and some money, and everybody has freedom of choice. We can choose where we live, what work we do, and we call this `the Pursuit of Happiness.' It is guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America. This doesn't mean that everybody is happy-but it means we can keep trying. The middle class is like a big sponge that soaks up people's anger and frustration.

"How can I explain? The middle class encourages ambition, and when you work hard, you can do well. We have the incentive to set our own goals and follow our own dreams."

Now it was very, very late. In the States, we could have stopped for an ice cream. Just think, somebody somewhere is making a fortune selling ice cream. If one guy makes ice cream-it exists. When two guys make and sell ice cream-the price goes down. When three guys compete selling ice cream-we get more flavors. When a hundred guys each make a ton of money selling ice cream-we just print more money! That's how it works.

The Fatherhood of God and the Fatherhood of Man

As one of the half-dozen people in America who have no time for movies, I satisfy my appetite for Hollywood's products by reading New York Times movie reviews. I gain similar satisfaction from book reviews, and Gilbert Meilaender wrote a lengthy one of an important new book out entitled Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem, by David Blankenhorn.

According to Mr. Meilaender's summary, Mr. Blankenhorn states that there are problems with the traditional norm of fatherhood, what he calls the "Old Father", and contemporary society puts in place of the Old Father new models such as the New Father, the Unnecessary Father, the Deadbeat Dad, Visiting Father, Sperm Father, Stepfather and Nearby Guy. Blankenhorn debunks all of these prototypes, and proposes an alternative, the "Good Family Man". The Good Family Man has four roles: to provide, to protect, to nurture, and to sponsor.

Gilbert Meilaender's comment is that it is not clear that this "Good Family Man" is different from the traditional ideal of the Old Father, and that just as most men is such societies fell short of the ideal, so too will most men who attempt it fall short of the "Good Family Man" model.

"Most readers," Meilaender suspects, "will be just a little disappointed by the policy proposals of the final chapter. Perhaps that is inevitable, given the scope of the book's critique." The scope of the book's critique, of course, is the object of lavish praise, so why excuse ourselves for failure to find solutions worthy of the critique? Are we no greater than the revolutionaries of the past two centuries, who can point out with devastating effect what is wrong with society, but come up with no viable alternatives?

Blankenhorn, in providing a minimal alternative vision, is just being honest. He recognizes that no imperfect man is going to become a perfect father. Nonetheless, he argues, it is far better to have the presence of a bad father than the absence of a good one. "While it is true that having a father sometimes fosters anger, having no father at all fosters much greater anger. It leads to 'mistrust, violence, nihilism.' A violent society results not from the bad example of fathers who abuse their power; it results from fatherlessness."

In other words, like everything else in this fallen world, fathers fall short of our expectations, but the institution of fatherhood itself, traditionally conceived, is a part of the order of nature. With this, I totally agree, and while I may be reading into Blankenhorn here, but I believe it to be an obvious deduction from his position.

Given this, I am intrigued by Blankenhorn's statement that there is a "combustible contradiction inherent within fatherhood-closeness partly through distance, affection partly through coercion [which] helps explain why fatherhood constitutes such a problematic contrivance in human societies." Fatherhood by definition contains internal contradictions: closeness and distance; affection and coercion. Meilaender summarizes the horns of this dilemma: "how can we establish practices that are compassionate but do not undercut the norms we seek to uphold" the old struggle between law and spirit. Compassion and - affection require closeness; upholding norms seems to require distance and coercion.

Meilaender makes an interesting proposal in the way of resolving this, however, "Even fatherhood itself, as a necessary cultural ideal, may need to be grounded in something that transcends the biological and anthropological 'givens' of human development and the social necessities of healthy societies. As a normative role that both attracts and compels us, fatherhood may need to mirror something that transcends such givens a Father whose glory is to serve the child, - even if the child slay him." This Meilaender calls "a transcendent Father . . . shaped by an unconditional love that goes beyond what is - given in the natural paternal impulse."

When Meilaender refers to "a transcendent Father," most religious people will understand that he is referring to God, our Heavenly Father, and not simply to a Jungian archetype. Jews, Christians and Muslims alike recognize God as a real, personal Father, the fount and source of the universe and humankind, who created us, male and female, in His image (Gen. 1:27). And here I point out that the problems Blankenhorn identifies with fatherhood are exactly the problems the western traditions have with God: spirit versus law; compassion versus coercion; closeness versus distance. The challenge, then, to proceed past the collapse of fatherhood, has two prongs. One, how can we graduate to a more mature, harmonious understanding of our Father God (while paying due respect to both horns of the dilemma). And, two, how we can inherit the Fatherhood of God; how the transcendent Father can become an incarnate father.

While this seems a simple enough conclusion, it actually flies in the face of the Christian conception of the cosmos, summarized by the liberal Protestant theologian and church historian Adolf Von Harnack in the late nineteenth century: "the essence of Christianity is the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man". God is a father and we are brothers. While many Christians reject much else Harnack represents, no one much questions this neat slogan, the Fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man. Why? because it is a correct statement regarding the Christian truth, which, in the end, views mankind not as parents and children but as brothers and sisters. Thus, after 2,000 years, the fruit of Christianity is the leveling of society, the end of hierarchy.

In the non-hierarchical universe, we all are brothers and sisters. There are no parents, no kings, no teachers, no priests, at least none who wield real authority. Locke, a representative democratic thinker, understood parenthood as nothing more than a legal status, binding certain individuals ("parents") to look after others ("children") until the latter could emerge as citizens. The emotive bonds between these individuals were incidental.

All of the problems of contemporary fatherhood stem from fact that we have all adopted the model that we are nothing but brothers and sisters, ontologically. There is no ontological difference between the members of a family; differences are only de juris. This is why Mr. Blankenhorn cannot come up with any convincing solutions. He is unwilling to question our fundamental cultural presuppositions. This is why Mr. Meilaender shrinks from the enforcement of norms, for what gives one brother the right to coerce another? When ontological hierarchy is removed, so too is rightful authority.

What of that one venerable bastion of hierarchy in the West, the Roman Catholic church? Yes it is venerable and it is powerful and it is based upon the truth of God. But it is only spiritual; it exists on the basis of persuasion and consent. By God's grace, the persuasion and consent girding the Catholic hierarchical society of the church have penetrated the deep psyche of the West, trading on our status as fallen and on its possession of the veritable keys to the kingdom, which resolve, to a degree at least, the problem of sin. Liberation from sin is a powerful energy, which unleashes creativity and civilization. But no one disputes that this resolution is partial. From the get-go, St. Paul instructed us that we see through a glass darkly, that we know, and are known, only in part; that the perfect has not yet come.

By God's grace, out of the ruins of Rome arose a Christian civilization. It was hierarchical; new civilizations are not created by brothers and sisters; they are created by warriors who muster armies, kings (and bishops) who rule territories, and fathers who beget lineages. The uniqueness of the Christian civilization which arose out of Rome was that a spiritual hierarchy intermingled with the secular hierarchies. But once this Christian civilization triumphed, the Christian hierarchy, slowly but surely, went the way of all flesh. Eventually, this hierarchy beget those who claimed sibling status and became another sect, the elder brother in a warring family of religions.

My argument is that there was a spiritual support, nay, a providential support, for a hierarchy built upon religious relations as a universal society. But eventually that providence passed, and hierarchical power collapsed, and the universal society became fragmented within with the various parts claiming the same starting points. This is the import of the Protestant Reformation.

Catholicism cannot succeed as the basis for a universal society. I fear that faithful Catholics believe that the church yet holds the keys to the kingdom, and that if all people become practicing Catholics the world will be saved. But this would be the world of medieval Europe. We cannot claim superior merit, from the human standpoint, to the people of the thirteenth century. And otherwise, we are left with the argument that the medieval Catholic church with modern technology and enlightened values concerning race and gender will equal the kingdom of God. Thus, the determining factor is technology and social ethics.

Well, Catholics might argue, at all times we have proclaimed that the kingdom will not come until the second advent of Jesus Christ. But is this argument one which its proponents take seriously, or is it just lip-service? To combine expectation of an inbreaking of God into history with a confidence in the institutions of the Catholic church as the best solution draws a fine line, the down side of which will lead such people to demanding that the second advent of Christ adhere to the conventions of the Catholic church.

The up side of the eschatological expectation is that Catholics, along with everyone else, must cry to heaven beyond the church walls for the way of true life, for the way of salvation in this age. And why are they not? Is not the Catholic church rent with strife? Who were the engineers of Marxist revolution in Latin America? How much longer will the vow of celibacy be respected or required? How much more erosion can the authority of the priest endure, or the claim of papal infallibility? Who among Catholics today would defend the Syllabus of Errors? When I assert that hierarchy is dead, I hope that Catholics do not exclude themselves by a quick unconscious identification with the theological structures of Augustine or Thomas and the social worlds built upon those structures which have long since disappeared.

Now we return to Mr. Meilaender's hesitant call for "a transcendent father" as a norm. He is hesitant because within the Christian worldview there is no foundation for such a call and no basis to believe that it will result in anything but a brief attempt to reinstate the model of the Old Father. The Old Father, New Father and other types exhaust the repertoire of the Christian providence. Why? Because the incarnation of Christ has the ontological status of a son. Jesus never became a physical father; he never stood as a husband. As Athenasius stated for the ages, "That which is not assumed is not saved". Jesus assumed sonship; and we can assume the same through faith in him. Jesus did not assume fatherhood; thus we cannot assume it in front of God. After all is said and done, it is that simple. A child can understand it.

Thus, the problem of fatherhood cannot be solved within the Christian providence, including its various degenerate forms. If we remain "good Christians," we will not solve the problem of the eclipse of fatherhood. At best we will recognize it, as Mr. Blankenhorn has done. Good Christians must take the next step and recognize that the tools at hand are not enough to solve the problem. In other words, we need help from above. If you say "We have help from above," then I say: "What you have is not enough; we've had that help for 2,000 years; we need more help from above" indeed, deep help from the one God. That is the toughest admission for convinced Christians to make; but make it they must, because it is Jesus himself who is bringing this help.

We have to move from the Fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man, to the Fatherhood of God and the fatherhood of man. How does one make that move? We have the forerunner in Jesus Christ. Jesus came as a son, liberating those who believe to become sons, even by adoption.

The next step is simple enough. In order to save, to liberate, to sanctify, the position of fathers and mothers of parents there must be perfected, sinless individuals (one man, one woman) who incarnate the true love of God as husband and wife, as parents. Then all must achieve this same standing through them. Is this against Jesus? No; it is the will of Jesus.

We need Jesus Christ to return as a husband and father. Marriage and family life are original categories of God's creation. To believe otherwise is to lapse into Gnosticism. Adam and Eve did not fall by virtue of having sex per se; they fell because their act of procreative love took place on the basis of selfish motives, under the influence of the archangel Lucifer-that ancient serpent, the devil or Satan (Rev. 12:9). Hence it could not be blessed by God. If reference to an archangel confuses you, I can use more conventional terms: Adam and Eve were children having children. They never became true adults, because once children have children, they have violated the principles which make for proper psychological growth.

It is not a sin for Jesus to return as a husband and father. It is not sinful to make love within the blessing of God. In fact, God wants us to do so; God created us to do so. The sexual organs are the most wonderful parts of the human body. When in the proper relationship with the mind and heart, they are the vehicle created by God to establish the primary unification between man and woman and with God Himself.

God is love, after all. God loves love affairs; it's just that God wants them to be eternal, and He wants them to be universal and totally selfless. He wants them to be perfect. The entire creation loves love, which reaches its culmination in the true marriage of man and woman.

What else can we do with the biblical sayings about the bride of Christ? Does Jesus want to kiss a church? Is the prophecy of the marriage supper of the Lamb just symbolic? According to this marriage hermeneutic, it is not ultimately symbolic (although it has symbolic meaning as well); it is to be fulfilled literally by the inbreaking of God.

What it comes down to, after all is said and done, is that the "transcendent father" will be realized in history. This is the help from above; this is the more help from above. And just as it always has, God's "help from above" sneaks up behind us and taps us on our shoulders, asking, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand staring up into the heavens?"

Structuring Your Sunday School Personnel

by Vicki Henry-U.C. Sunday School Principal, Minneapolis, MN

This article was also to include Effective Teaching Techniques and Teacher Training; however, there is so much information on that topic and the article presented here, that I decided to divide them. I will write on Effective Teaching Techniques next month.

It is important to create a physical structure of hierarchy in order to have a Sunday School that will grow and progress. If there is only a horizontal order of teachers sharing time slots, then it is difficult to develop a formal, orderly curriculum. This will lead to confusion and a lack of continuity in your lessons. There must be some vertical "chain of command" to help facilitate the needs of the Sunday School.

An example of this vertical structure could be as in the diagram.

Job Descriptions

Principal: They oversee all operations of the Sunday School. They establish and communicate the philosophy of education, and goals and objectives of the Sunday School. They handle problems, communicate with the State and Regional Leaders, get the budget approved, have periodic teachers' meetings and establish teacher training programs.

Curriculum Coordinator: They help establish curriculums based upon goals and objectives. They also formulate teacher evaluations and student evaluations. This person would be the one to order and buy most of the materials and supplies for all grade levels. They might even create teaching aids. They would assist the Head Teachers in structuring the classroom environment, help the Principal in teacher training and communicate any problems or successes to the Principal.

Head Teachers: They should establish a clear mission statement for their grade level. This would include how they are going to implement the overall Sunday School goals and objectives for their particular grade level (what kinds of teaching techniques, materials used, activities as well as subject areas to be focused on). They would establish the individual lesson topics to be taught each Sunday. They may work with the Curriculum Coordinator on this. They would oversee all other teachers in their grade level, coordinate teaching schedules, handle student evaluations and parent/teacher conferences, help set up the room environment and teach.

Teachers: They assist their Head Teacher and teach.

What should be expected of a Sunday School Teacher?

1. Prepare the lesson plan for each class they are going to teach
2. Get there at least 10 minutes before class to start to prepare
3. Set a good example in their personal life
4. Give advanced notice if not able to teach that Sunday and get a substitute
5. Have a willingness to learn and grow
6. Know needs of children and be sensitive to individual situations, structuring their lesson as such (i.e., disabled children)-I will be dealing with inclusion in a later article.
7. Participate in teacher training programs

What are Sunday School Leaders' responsibilities?

Appreciation and support of your teachers and other Sunday School staff is the most important responsibility of the Regional and State Leaders and Sunday School Principal. All staff should be honored in some way at least once a year. This could take the form of Certificates of Appreciation being publicly given out after Sunday Service. (This can be coordinated to include the Sunday School advancements of children graduating from one grade level to the next. I have been holding them the last Sunday in August before the next school year arrives.)

Perhaps you would like to hold a special dinner for your teachers. If this is done, make sure they do not have to bring the food or have to take care of their children at the same time. Leaders should either arrange child care from among members of the congregation at the church or make arrangements at a professional child drop-off site. One note about babysitting: don't just corral children into one room without a definite schedule of structured and non-structured activities. If you don't make proper plans, then the children will just be "bouncing off the walls" and total chaos ensues. Even when babysitting, proper adult supervision, environment and supplies are necessary.

In locales where there is a large congregation such as New York, Washington DC, LA, etc., you may want to select a "Teacher of the Month" and put a photo and short biography of the person in the monthly Sunday School or church newsletter. If there is no newsletter, then display it on a main bulletin board at the church.

Of course, the entire Sunday School and staff should always be included in the public and private prayers of the leaders. Also, all church members should be encouraged to pray regularly for Sunday School staff. This does not have to be in the form of a special prayer condition, but just part of everyone's daily prayer life.

A Reminder to Parents and Church Leaders

There are certain things that frustrate your Sunday School teachers the most. Please be aware of these and try your best to see that they do not occur.

1. Late arrivals
2. People popping in to make announcements
3. Groups of individuals who use the classroom during the week, "borrow" supplies, and don't clean up (this is my one major craw)
4. The chalk and eraser monster

There are also some things that Sunday School teachers like to hear often. They are:

1. Thank you
2. Keep up the good work
3. See you next Sunday
4. I (or, My child) enjoyed the lesson

The main thing I stress in establishing a Sunday School is professionalism, responsibility, accountability, appreciation and support. These must always be on the minds and in the actions of our church leaders and all those interested in Sunday School. Without them there will be no growth, not only of Sunday School, but of our movement as a whole. If you have an effective Sunday School, then people will be inspired and motivated to come to church. In order to have a successful Sunday School, it needs support, not only spiritually, but in structure and physical form.

Position Available Teaching International Youth in Korea

The Study-in-Korea program is looking for a vibrant couple to join the staff team as teacher(s) and dorm parents for the School term beginning the end of August 1995. The dynamic couple Steve and Jerry Tamayo will comprise the other half of the team. They have been in Korea for the past year learning "the ropes" from Malcolm and Suemi Allan, who will be leaving Korea this summer, when their visas expire, after serving the program for the past three years.

The job would include teaching Math and preferably also English Literature or Social Studies at the 7th and 8th grade levels, as well as caring for teenagers from around the globe. This includes spiritual guidance as well as religious education. One member of the couple should have a college degree and be capable of teaching Math. It is preferred that one member of the couple has some knowledge of Korean and/or Japanese, though it is not required.

It is an exciting and challenging position which requires a real love for and rapport for children. Your couple should have a strong internal life of faith, with which you can create a nurturing environment in which to stimulate the growth of both the intellectual and internal selves of the children.

Interviews will begin soon, as it is an immediate position. It is preferable that at least one person go by mid-summer, in order to attend a short orientation, conducted by Malcolm and Suemi.

For applications or to make an interview appointment, contact: Tom or Carolynn Burkholder, 1245 Jackson St., Peekskill, NY 10566: (914) 734- 7009.