by Elgin Hushbeck, Jr., Engineer, Christian apologist, and author of Christianity and Secularism, Preserving Democracy: What the Founding Fathers Knew, What We Have Forgotten, and How It Threatens Democracy and What is Wrong with Social Justice?
Many people have complained in the past about having undesirable choices when going to the ballot box, but never has the nation faced a choice between two less desirable candidates than this year. When asked, I portray the election as between two unelectable candidates except that they are running against each other.
If you are Republican in a reliably blue state, or a Democrat in a reliably red state, you are blessedly freed from having to worry, for your vote will not affect the outcome. However those who live in swing states face a very difficult choice.
There are only 3 options: vote for Trump, Clinton, or sit this one out. Some will argue they will vote for a 3rd party candidate or write someone’s name in. Ok, but that has the same net effect as sitting it out, and to believe otherwise is to delude yourself. It may make you feel better, but it will have no effect on the outcome except possibly as a spoiler.
For Trump, the problem is that he is a bombastic reality TV show star with a thin skin. Perhaps the best synopsis of Trump I have heard was from Hugh Hewitt, who likened him to the Roman leader Sulla whose epitaph was, “No friend ever served me, and no enemy every wronged me, whom I have not repaid in full.” Trump often seems more interested in settling scores than running for office.
He has no discernable ideology and has been on both sides of many issues, allowing him to claim he was on whatever side seems best for him at the moment. Even now his positions often changes. While there is clearly an honesty problem here, it is one common to most politicians, akin to Kerry’s statement that he was for the bill before he was against it. The bigger issue is that he seems to have little knowledge of the position he is running for. Even when warned that a question about the nuclear triad might come up in the debates, he was still caught off guard and did not know what it was. In short he is completely unsuited for the job.
This would seem to make Clinton an easy choice. Yet, up against Trump’s possible future incompetence we have Clinton’s track record of incompetence. On her watch as Secretary of State we have disaster after disaster that has left the world in a much worse state: the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt; the war and its aftermath in Libya; the Russian reset and the invasion of the Crimea, and now troops massing on the new boarder threatening another war; the failure to get a Status of Forces Agreement in Iraq that lead to the rise of ISIS; and the terrible mishandling of Syria, to name just a few.
The real problem is that her issues with truth go far beyond the normal political aim of trying to present oneself in the best light. She is corrupt, and corruption is much harder to address than incompetence, particularly given the modern Democratic Party, as an arm of the Clinton machine which works feverishly to protect her and her husband and has done so for some time now.
At least with Trump, I can point to the fact that there were 17 candidates who divided up the vote, a media who gave him an estimated $2 billion in free media coverage, party in-fighting that could not settle on an alternative, and open primaries that allowed non-Republicans to help pick the Republican nominee. I do not like it but I can at least see how he became the nominee.
For Democrats, Clinton’s hold over the party was such that she was basically the only choice that was allowed. The only other semi-real candidate was Sanders, but the DNC rigged the game to make sure he could not win and this was clear to me even before the leak of DNC emails.
The pattern is clear going back decades. When they are caught, the Clintons just lie. When it is shown that they are lying they simply change to new lies. When those are shown to be false, they change to yet more lies. At some point they begin to claim they have already fully answered all the questions and anyone who continues to pointing out their lies is simply playing politics, while the Clintons just want to move on and get back to the business of the American people. Yet many Democrats are either in denial or simply do not care that she is corrupt, and are immune to any evidence to the contrary.
The most recent example of this was the discovery that she had a secret email server. As usual she told lie after lie after lie in an attempt to get around the issue. When the FBI director testified before Congress that she had lied repeatedly in her testimony, which is perjury, she even lied about that and claimed the FBI director had said she had been completely truthful.
Even now, Democrats in the know are holding their breath. Not that her server was hacked by foreign powers, that is a given that has already seriously damaged the country and very likely led to at least one death, probably many more. No, they are afraid that the missing 33,000 emails will be released before the election. The handful that have already come out show, not wedding plans and yoga classes as she claimed, but a pattern of collusion between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation that have already raised serious questions about selling the foreign policy of the United States.
The fact is the Clintons not only operate outside the laws the rest of us have to follow, but they consistently put their own interest ahead of the country. Nowhere was this clearer than while the fire fight in Benghazi was still raging and the lives of Doherty and Woods hung in the balance. The Action Points of a meeting held to deal with the situation showed that instead of focusing on getting them help, Clinton was focused on fabricating a cover story to protect herself and the administration. As for Doherty and Woods, help was never sent and hours later they were killed. At the arrival of the caskets, Clinton, being Clinton, lied to the families to further the false cover story.
Based on the FBI investigation, there is now no doubt that she broke the law and endangered national security with her server. But it is also pretty clear that the fix was in, and she was never going to be prosecuted for her crime. The FBI, like the Justice Department, IRS, EPA, and many other branches of government have been corrupted into just another arm of the Democratic party, which is now little more than part of the Clinton machine, protecting and bestowing favors on friends and going after enemies.
At least if Trump causes problems there is no doubt that Republicans will quickly join Democrats to block him. After all they are having trouble supporting him even now with an election in the balance. So the choice for me is easy and I will vote for Trump. Trump can and probably will cause problems, but the country will survive, and one can at least hope he will only be a 1-term President.
The country cannot survive the corruption Clinton will bring, at least not in the democratic form of government where the people have a real say in who runs their government. She will bring to the country what she brought to the Democratic Party nomination process, a system where opposition is allowed to run, but the fix will be in and they will not be allowed to win.
I don’t like it, and I wish I had a better choice, but wishing does not make it so and this is the choice I have.
[slideshow_deploy id=’2411′]
Blog
-
Elgin Hushbeck, Jr.: The Least Bad Choice
-
Bruce Epperly: Philippians and Facebook Etiquette for Christians
by Dr. Bruce G. Epperly, pastor, professor and author of Process Theology: Embracing Adventure with God, Finding God in Suffering: A Journey with Job, Transforming Acts: Acts of the Apostles as a 21st Century Gospel, Ruth and Esther: Women of Agency and Adventure, and more!
A number of years ago, I wrote a piece in which I asserted that Facebook provides an opportunity for people to affirm the holiness of everyday. Now, in this election year, I have a different perspective. Yes, I still believe that Facebook reflects the moment by moment wonder of living and our gratitude for life itself in its quotidian activities. As such, Facebook can contribute to our spiritual growth and our empathy with others’ spiritual journeys. It can create community and renew friendships.
But, Facebook has become over the past year a place of venom, insult, and impoliteness in which people regularly post responses with words they would never say in face to face encounters. In the past few months, I have had someone drop the F-bomb on my wall in response to my affirmation of President Obama and another person refer to me as ignorant when my position differed from his. I have found that you can even talk about the weather and receive a contrary response. I have been insulted by the left for being too moderate and the right for being too progressive. I have received disparaging remarks from Clinton, Sanders, and Trump supporters, all of whom have questioned my good faith. Moreover I see the commandment not to bear false witness routinely violated by persons who would otherwise claim to be honest followers of Jesus. Lies about political figures or distortions of facts are routinely posted by otherwise decent people, sometimes just a few minutes after leaving church.
I believe that the words of Philippians 4:4-9 provide good counsel for Facebook users who claim to be followers of Jesus. First, Philippians counsels “let your gentleness be known to everyone.” This is surely good spiritual counsel for Facebook users: When you post, it is appropriate to answer a few fundamental questions: Does your post have an irenic spirit? Do you respond in terms of policy, beliefs, and issues, and not in terms of personality? Do you assume that your position is limited – that’s the reality of perspective and sin – and not absolutely right? Do your posts evidence respect for those with whom you dialogue, formerly known as the “loyal opposition.”
Philippians tell us to be gentle even when you disagree. Are you adding joy to the world, as Paul counsels, or do your posts create alienation between people?
Paul also says, “whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and anything worthy of praise, think about these things.” In other words, live affirmatively and speak affirmatively. In the political realm, focus on the positives of your candidate’s position and not the negatives of the other candidate. Don’t post news items without checking for their accuracy. While I don’t post news items often, I always go to factcheck.org, polifact.com or snopes.com before posting something about whose veracity about I’m uncertain. While these sites aren’t perfect, they are generally free of bias and give positive and negative evaluations of both conservative and liberal candidates.
Philippians reminds us to look for the best in others and try to understand contrasting positions before challenging them. Other persons may be just as sure of their position as you are sure of your own. Further, people of differing viewpoints also love their nation and seek the highest good for our country. Try to avoid name calling even if it is tempting to say “Lyin’ Donald Trump” or “Crooked Hillary Clinton.”
Don’t claim expertise where you have none. I tend to use terms these days such as “I have a contrasting position” or “I believe otherwise” or “we will have to disagree on this” rather than any sort of invective. After all, I could be wrong and in the spirit of Niebuhr, I need to look for the truth in my neighbor’s falsehood and the falsehood in my own truth. All perspectives are limited, finite, and prone to self-interest. Moreover, sin infects even our highest motives.
Finally, ask yourself the following questions before posting or responding: Is this true or accurate? Is it healing? Will it only add fuel to the fire of polarization? Does it glorify God and contribute to a “more perfect union”?
We need to follow our better angels, as Lincoln counseled, and this applies to Facebook, the election, and every aspect of our lives. Above all, let us who claim to be Christians be persons who are instruments of peace, following the pathway of Jesus, and leaning not to our own perspective but following God’s greater vision, so that we might be healthy activists and hospitable in our disagreements, and claim our vocation as God’s healing partners in our troubled world.
[slideshow_deploy id=’2461′] -
Herold Weiss: Why are you afraid?
by Dr. Herold Weiss, Professor Emeritus of Religious Studies at St. Mary’s College in Notre Dame, IN and author of Meditations on According to John, Meditations on the Letters of Paul, Creation in Scripture, and Finding my Way in Christianity: Recollections of a Journey
As spectators of the current campaigns for the presidency of the United States, we have been regaled with abundant evidence of the power of fear. Whether the fear politicians appeal to is that provoked by news of uncalled for violence, that of immigrants who are considered dangerous by some, that of judges who will not decide the way some think they should, that of economic conditions that will take away the wealth of some or prevent others from creating wealth for themselves, or that of the possibility that this or that unqualified candidate will become president, it is clear that the contenders in this race understand that fear is quite capable of stifling reason.
Both candidates to the presidency of this country are also emphasizing that their opponent cannot be trusted, while contending that they, of course, are most worthy of the trust of all voters. Thus, the presidential election is in a very real sense an election to be decided on the basis of whom do you trust to take away your fears. This question needs to be answered not just at the time of voting for a president but frequently in the lives of those confronted by the call of Christ.
According to the apostle Paul, Christians are those who live their lives in terms of the faith Jesus had when facing death. Jesus did not face crucifixion thinking that it was just a performance that would provide justification for pardoning sinners. He faced death as a human being who trusted, had faith in God. On that basis Paul invites all human beings to be crucified with Christ and then live in the faith of Jesus. That is, Christians are those who participate in the faith Jesus displayed when facing death and are then faithful to what God has promised to do for the faithful because they live in Christ.
It is a common misunderstanding to think that the enemy of faith is doubt, but that is not at all the case when faith is understood correctly. Doubt may be considered the enemy of faith only when faith is reduced to a mental exercise. As activities in the mind, faith and doubt are always in dialogue. Mental agreement to a proposition without the consideration of arguments for or against is not worth much. It may turn out to be a prejudice, an illusion, or just a misconception. In the mind, all propositions must be able to stand against doubt. All propositions must be examined critically; otherwise, they are just naive personal opinions or intuitions. Doubt is the essential companion of faith in the mind.
Faith, however, is not just something that happens in the mind, even if it also involves the mind. Faith is something that is validated by a way of being. Faith is the demonstration of one’s certainty of God’s promise by a way of living. Paul certainly addresses the mind and argues extensively for his understanding of the Gospel and for the authenticity of his apostleship. His strongest admonitions, however, are directed at what his converts are doing or consider doing. Their error is to judge or despise others, to settle internal disputes by taking fellow Christians to court, to wish to be circumcised, to make of the Lord’s Supper a personal meal, to visit prostitutes, to practice “abnormal” sex, etc. He tells his converts that “their manner of life must be worthy of the Gospel” (Philippians 1:27).
For Paul the Gospel is power, power to live faithful to the promise of God. All the faithful join the father of the young man with a dumb spirit who asked Jesus, “If you can do anything, have pity on us and help us.” To his request, Jesus answered, “All things are possible to him who believes.” The father then cried out, “I believe; help my unbelief” (Mark 9:22-24). That is the human condition of all believers. In the mind, faith and doubt are in dialectical tension.
The faith that justifies, as Paul insists, is lodged in the heart, the core of being, and produces obedience (Romans 6:17; 10:9-10; 1 Corinthians 7:37; 2 Corinthians 9:7). The enemy of that kind of faith is fear. Fear is what prevents the power of the Gospel to determine conduct. Fear prevents reason from functioning and empowers the emotions to rule over the heart. Fear makes one think that the manner of life empowered by the Gospel is going to bring about dire consequences on one’s security in the world. Faith is the power that can put away fear from the heart.
In the New Testament, when an angel intervenes in someone’s life, he greets the human addressee with the words, “Fear not” (Matthew 1:20; Luke 1:13, 30, 50; 2:10; Acts 27:24). When Jesus came to the disciples walking on the Sea of Galilee in the middle of a storm, and the disciples thought a ghost was approaching, Jesus greeted then saying, “Take heart, it is I; have no fear” (Mark 6:50; Matthew 14: 27; John 6:20). The admonition not to succumb to fear is preceded by the affirmation “It is I,” a most telling reason for the dispelling of fear. The three gospels that tell this story describe the disciples seeing a ghost in the middle of the storm as paralyzed by fear, terrified. That is the human condition. It is most revealing that the gospels make clear that the disciples were not afraid when they were engaged in surviving in the middle of a stormy sea. They became afraid when they saw Jesus walking in the sea but had not recognized him. Being approached by an unidentified stranger with evident divine power caused them to be afraid as their minds struggled with doubts. The three sentences in Jesus’ greeting are lined up perfectly: 1) “Take heart,” become whole again; 2) “it is I,” God is here, and 3) “have no fear,” have faith instead.
The enemy of faith is fear. That truth is especially made clear by the gospel of Mark. In this gospel there are two stories of Jesus and the disciples crossing the Sea of Galilee in a storm. In the first one, Jesus has been sleeping in the boat while the storm is raging. When the disciples wake him up, Jesus asks, “Why are you afraid? Have you no faith?” (Mark 4:40). Here the opposition of faith and fear is explicit. Faith is a manner of life, and fear is what paralyzes the mind and the heart, thus allowing for life in the ways of the world to take over.
In several of the healings related in Mark fear is a prominent feature. When the Gadarenes came out of the city to find out what had happened to their swine, they saw the man possessed by a demon now healed and “they were afraid” (Mark 5:15). When on his way to the house of Jairus a woman touched Jesus’ garment and Jesus looked around to find the culprit, the woman came forward “in fear and trembling.” Then Jesus said to her, “Daughter, your faith has made you well” (Mark 5:34). When messengers came saying that there was no longer need for Jesus to go on because Jairus’ daughter had died, Jesus said to Jairus, “Do not fear, only believe” (Mark 5:36). Again, the opposition of faith and fear is explicit.
One of the characteristics of Mark is its negative portrayal of the disciples. Repeatedly the narrator highlights the disciples’ lack of understanding of what Jesus says or does. After the feeding of the multitude and the calming of the storm in the sea, we read that ‘they were utterly astounded, for they did not understand about the loaves, and their hearts were hardened” (Mark 6:51-52). When on the road to Jerusalem Jesus explains to the disciples the need to fulfill his vocation in Jerusalem, we read that the disciples “did not understand the saying, and they were afraid to ask him” (Mark 9:32). My favorite verbal picture in Mark says, “They were on the road going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them; and they were amazed, and those who followed were afraid” (Mark 10:32). They had premonitions of what would happen in Jerusalem and could not understand how Jesus could be determined to go there. They doubted the wisdom of his actions. They feared the consequences of appearing in Jerusalem with Jesus. These few words set the stage for the events in Jerusalem. As Jesus accomplishes his vocation, the lack of faith of the disciples caused them not just to walk dragging behind but to abandon him in fear.
Finally, the ultimate expression of this leitmotive, is found in the last words of this gospel according to the most ancient manuscripts available to us. They end the gospel in verse 8 of chapter 16. This ending is a bit abrupt, but totally Markan. Mark’s style is succinct. The chapter begins telling of a group of women who intend to anoint Jesus’ body and very early on Sunday morning go to the sepulcher with aromatic spices. At the tomb rather than Jesus’ body they find a young man dressed in a white robe sitting, and they get scared. The young man tells them to tell the disciples to go to Galilee where Jesus will meet them. The evangelist then closes his book writing, “And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had come upon them; and they said nothing to any one, for they were afraid” (Mark 16:8).
By means of this ending, the evangelist’s picture of the disciples as paralyzed by fear reaches its climax. Of course, he wrote the gospel as a definitive expression of his faith. In the process of writing, however, he took care to insist that the followers of Jesus should not be following him to Jerusalem dragging behind in fear. Neither should they become so afraid of the consequences that they fail to tell others that Jesus is alive. Fear is what prevents Christians from living up to the demands of the Gospel. Faith is a way of being in the world that triumphs over the fear that is endemic to life in the midst of the chaotic situations faced in this mortal life. The fear that blocks reason, paralyzes the heart and allows the world to guide one’s life cannot be found in a Christian’s life.
[slideshow_deploy id=’2675′] -
Tuesday Night Hangout: Michael Kennedy Jr. on Christian Education
Henry Neufeld interviewed Michael Kennedy, Jr., author of Parent-Driven Discipleship for the Tuesday Night Hangout this week. Feel free to comment here or on our YouTube channel.
-
Bob Cornwall: What Use is God?
by Dr. Robert D. Cornwall, pastor and author, from his blog, Ponderings on a Faith Journey. Author of Ultimate Allegiance: The Subversive Nature of the Lord’s Prayer, Unfettered Spirit: Spiritual Gifts for the New Great Awakening, Marriage in Interesting Times: A Pariticipatory Study Guide, and more!
What use is God if God can’t or won’t prevent evil from occurring? That’s a question people have been asking for millennia. Theologians and philosophers have done their best offer answers defending God (the term for this is theodicy), but the question keeps arising. It would be easier if Christian theology allowed for the existence of two equally powerful gods, one good and the other evil (dualism). Then evil could be blamed on the evil god, leaving the God of love untainted. Unfortunately, that solution isn’t available to Christians, for like other traditional monotheistic religions, Christians believe that God has no ultimate rival. Therefore, we must look elsewhere for answers.
A seventeenth-century theologian suggested this is “the best possible world,” and so we should accept things as they are. This solution, however, ultimately failed to gain full support. Either God is capable of keeping evil at bay (omnipotent) and fails to do so, or God is too weak to address evil. If either is true, then why bother with God? (Read More … )
[slideshow_deploy id=’2343′] -
Allan Bevere: We Need the Whole of Scripture for Christian Ethics
from the personal blog of Dr. Allan Bevere, pastor, professor, and author of Politics of Witness: The Character of the Church in the World, Colossians and Philemon: A Participatory Study Guide, and more
Christians have always struggled to view the whole of Scripture as authoritative in a practical sense, but it has become fashionable of late to deliberately argue that 21st century Christians should have a canon within a canon, that we modern, enlightened, scientifically-oriented believers have the wisdom to decide which Scriptures are relevant only for today and which are only for a by-gone more primitive era.
The problem with such a view is that the church hasn’t left us with that option. All Scripture is authoritative and necessary for Christian ethics, for Christian life– from law to prophetic pronouncement, from poetry to prose, from parable to narrative– all of it is authoritative. Once we realize this, we are freed from the arrogance of suggesting that we know more than the ecclesiastical wisdom of the ages what God has and has not said, and we can spend our time reading, interpreting, struggling, and wrestling with the biblical narrative from Genesis to Revelation in all of its complexity. (Read more … )
[slideshow_deploy id=’2564′] -
David Moffett-Moore: God of All Creation
by Dr. David Moffett-Moore, pastor and author of The Jesus Manifesto: A Participatory Study Guide to the Sermon on the Mount, Pathways to Prayer, Wind and Whirlwind: Being a Pastor in a Storm of Change, and more!
The Psalmist writes, “O God, our God, how majestic is your name over all creation!” as book-ends for a psalm that beholds the wonders of the universe, the stars above and the flocks beneath, and in wonder and delight is moved to glorify God.
My father was walking home from a Boy Scout meeting late one evening and, beholding the canopy of creation over his head, the heavens in all their glory, felt that oceanic oneness and described this experience as his call to professional ministry. Growing up in a Christian Scientist household, he had little experience of clergy yet this mystic encounter convinced him to become one.
“Why not a scientist?” I asked him. “Why not an astronomer or astrophysicist and study those stars in the midnight sky?” But it was not that kind of reasonable, rational experience; it was more experiential than intellectual. He felt called, compelled to a spiritual pursuit based upon this physical, tangible experience.
I think modern science is, or at least can be, a divine revelation and an opportunity to experience the divine in contemporary ways. God may be encountered in telescope or microscope, in petri dish or specimen slide as readily as in any sacred text, any holy canon.
One of the biblical images of God and nature is that all the universe is but the garb that God wears, worn not to conceal but to reveal God’s divine presence in, with and through all of God’s creation. In my studies of Celtic spirituality I am reminded that the Christian Celts regarded the created order as God’s first revelation and any text on a page or written manuscript as a secondary revelation. Even according to those written words, God’s first spoken words were “Let there be!” and there was, as God in Genesis speaks creation into being.
In my book Creation in Contemporary Experience I include introductory chapters on scripture and doctrine, but the meat of the book is in modern science as contemporary revelations and experiences of the divine. Evolutionary biology and morphic field theory, the big bang as God’s “Let there be,” quantum mechanics as the dance of the cosmos, chaos theory as allowing free will, Christ as an event of spiritual singularity.
I believe that the God who loves us, forms us, frees us and fills us, desires to be known and experienced by us, wants to be at one with us in our atonement, and therefore continues to reveal God’s presence, purpose and promise to us through our study of all creation, from quarks to quasars, from electron probability fields to black holes. I believe that scientists of all stripes can join with mystics and theologians, declaring “O God, our God, how majestic is your name in all creation!”
[slideshow_deploy id=’2755′] -
Tuesday Night Hangout: Gathering to Scatter – Scattering to Gather
Our guest on Tuesday night was Rev. Chris Freet, author of A New Look at Hospitality as a Key to Missions, but we were talking about his church’s approach to Christian education. Chris prefers the word “discipleship.”
What about a “no” to a “Sunday School hour,” and a strong “yes” to small groups to meet outside the context of the church building?
-
David Alan Black: A New School Year and a Favorite Book
from David Alan Black‘s blogsite, jesusparadigm.com.
I’m really looking forward to a fun and exciting fall semester, not least because I’m teaching NT Intro again for the first time in several years. The course covers Acts – Revelation, which means that, if I time things just right, the semester will end before I have to discuss the Apocalypse (wink, wink)! Let me tell you how we’re beginning the class. Day One consists of students reading the book of Acts and then also reading my Seven Marks of a New Testament Church – which, I would remind you, is nothing but an exegesis of Acts 2:37-47, eleven of the most action-packed verses in the entire New Testament. Students will then produce a “reaction paper” to what they have read and I’ll ask for a few volunteers to share with the rest of us what they learned. Thus, from the very first day of class, we’ll be asking ourselves the question: “What does an obedient church look like?” Christian discipleship means placing ourselves under orders. It’s not merely a psychological experiment in self-improvement (along with watching our weight and catching up on our Honey-Do lists). As disciples, we are not on our own. The goal is not self-actualization but obedience to the instructions of the church’s Head and only Boss. (Read more … ) -
Doris H. Murdoch: The Wailing Wall
by Doris Horton Murdoch, author of Testify: By the Blood of the Lamb and the Word of our Testimony and Constructing Your Testimony
The Purification Font at the Western Wall, Wailing Wall, The HaKotel HaMa’Aravi
I wash my hands in innocence, and go around your altar, O LORD. – Psalm 26:6 (NRSV)
The Western Wall lies within the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. Jews and Christians from all over the world come here to pray. One might view individuals at or near the Wall participating in numerous tasks as they stand before God: purifying through handwashing; preparing their minds for prayer through blessings and positions; reverently touching the Wall structure; bowing on bended knee; wailing or crying; praying; kissing the stonework; writing prayers and stuffing the folded prayers in the deep crevices of the stones; or reading from the Torah, the Jewish Old Testament. These behaviors date back as far as 30 B.C.E. and reaffirm the relationship and respect one has for G-d.
In II Corinithians 7:1, Paul reminds believers of the daily spiritual cleansing that one is obligated to in awe of God and in thankfulness for the promise of forgiveness of sins, salvation through Jesus Christ and eternal life. Since we have these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and of spirit, making holiness perfect in the fear of God. Jewish tradition requires purifying oneself before approaching the Western Wall. As one approaches the Western Wall plaza, most individuals will take note of the purification or handwashing stations. As I enthusiastically approached the Western Wall with the rain pouring down over my cloaked body, I failed to take note of the purification stations. I stood in line to approach the Wall and, in my turn, touched the Wall and offered my prayer to God. As I turned around, back to the Wall, I noticed the purification or handwashing fonts. They were white and gold ornate basins with four faucets and doubled-handed cups or vessels available for use in the handwashing ritual, I immediately felt guilty that I had not purified my hands before approaching the Wall. This purification brings one to innocency before God (Psalm 26:6) As one of the most sacred places for Jews, I wanted to honor tradition. As a Christian, I am adopted into God’s family that begins with Jewish tradition through Jesus Christ, our Jewish Savior.
I photographed the font and promised myself that I would do further research on the purification font. Then if I ever had the opportunity to go back to Jerusalem, I would be on purifying myself before approaching the Wall for prayer. After researching and learning more about the handwashing ritual, I feel relieved that I had not washed my hands at the washing station because I would have dishonored Jewish tradition by doing this incorrectly. (I learned I had already dishonored tradition by turning my back to the Wall after praying and then carrying on a big discussion with fellow members of the tour group.)
According to tradition, one fills the 2-handled cup or vessel with water (Males must have their heads covered.). After this, both hands are removed from the cup. Then take the cup in your right hand or dominant hand, and transfer to the other hand, most often the left hand. Pour the water one time over the right hand being sure to wash to the wrist with fingers apart so that all of the hand is cleansed or purified. Transfer the cup to the right hand and pour over the left hand. The cup goes back to the left hand by moving from handle to handle of the vessel washing the right hand. Then transfer back to the right hand and wash the left hand. The process is complete after three washings of both hands. During all of this washing, one is preparing his heart for praying to God by meditating on the words of the handwashing blessing that will be stated at the end of the cleansing process. Washing complete, the individual shakes the excess water from the hands. He then raises his hands to the level of his eyes (Psalm 134:2: Lift up your hands to the holy place, and bless the Lord.) and looks at his hands and says the handwashing blessing:Blessed are You Lord, Our God, King of the Universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us regarding the washing of the hands.
He then dries his hands and leaves the empty cup upside down at the station (One never leaves water in the vessel.). The towel should also be disposed of as it holds impurities transferred from the hands to the towel.
I also learned that I should have backed away from the Wall, for turning your back to the Wall is disrespectful. Other ways of being respectful include: honoring the separation of men and women at the wall (Stay within your section!); turning off cell phones; showing quiet reverence (No conversations with others!); no photography of the Wall on the Sabbath, Friday PM – Saturday PM; and lastly, as mentioned earlier, men should have their heads covered with a yarmulke, sunhat or cap. If I ever have the opportunity to visit the wall again, I think I can be a more respectful visitor to one of the most holy places on earth.
[slideshow_deploy id=’2440′]