Four Die on the Way Down Mount Everest

Four Die on the Way Down Mount Everest

The Wired Word for May 27, 2012

In the News

Mountaineers have a term for what happened on Mount Everest last week: "summit fever." And what happened is that four climbers of the highest peak in the world died while trying to get back down.

The dead include a 61-year-old German medical doctor, a 33-year-old Nepali-born Canadian woman, a 44-year-old man from South Korea and a 55-year-old man from China. Their demise brings to six the number who have died climbing up or down the mountain this year.

At 29,028 feet high, Everest's weather is seldom ideal for long, but the longest windows for ascent normally occur in the spring, from late March to the first week in June, which means that all those who want to climb the highest real estate on earth need to make their attempts within that time frame. This year, however, the season's first clear conditions for reaching the pinnacle occurred last Friday (the 18th), and many of the approximately 200 people waiting at base camp started upward.

The weather window closed the next day, however, due to high winds, and prudence dictated that those still ascending should turn back and wait for a later opportunity. Several climbers, however, kept moving upward, where they came to the bottleneck known as the Hillary Step, a rockface near the peak that climbers from the Nepal side of the mountain have to ascend and descend in single file with the help of ropes. The difficulty of the climb means that progress up the Step is slow -- and is slowed further by descending climbers -- meaning that the mountaineers sometimes have to wait for hours for their turn, using up their precious supply of bottled oxygen because of the thin air at that altitude and risking frostbite because of the forced inactivity.

The extended time near the summit also increases the likelihood that people will succumb to other maladies related to high altitude, such as cerebral edema, which is the reported cause of the death of the German climber.

When climbers are that near the peak -- and often have spent tens of thousands of dollars on the expedition -- some persist in their summit attempt despite the warnings of guides. They expend so much energy getting up that when conditions turn against them on the descent, they don't have enough energy to deal with getting down.

While there have been six deaths so far this year, it's not the worst on record. The most disastrous one to date was the 1996 climbing season when 15 people died on Everest, including eight caught in a fast-moving storm on May 10-11. Some of their bodies, along with others who perished in other years, are still up there.

The ill-fated 1996 expedition that resulted in the eight deaths has been documented by Jon Krakauer in his best-selling book Into Thin Air. Most of the climbers made it to the top, but only because they pushed on past the turn-around deadline of 2 p.m., a time that had been established through the collective wisdom of those who had made the assault on Everest over the years. If the summit was not reached by then, the climbers were to turn around and descend to camp.

Yet, some climbers, including experienced guides who knew better, pushed on to the summit anyway, some not arriving until as late as 4:30 p.m. They were hit by 70-knot winds and blinding snow on their descent. Krakauer, who was himself on the mountain that year, says that "over the previous month, [Rob Hall, leader of the expedition,] had lectured us repeatedly about the importance of having a predetermined turn-around time on our summit day -- in our case it would probably be 1 p.m. or 2 p.m. at the very latest -- and abiding by it no matter how close we were to the top. 'With enough determination, any bloody idiot can get up this hill,' Hall observed. 'The trick is to get back down alive.'" (Jon Krakauer, Into Thin Air [New York: Anchor Books, 1997], 5, 190.) Ironically, and tragically, Hall apparently broke his own rules and paid the ultimate price.

That's summit fever. Although the tragedy has to be attributed to the storm, if the climbers had obeyed their own rules and turned back by 2 p.m. no matter how close they were to the summit, they'd have likely all been back in the relative safety of their tents and sleeping bags at Camp Four when the storm hit. But the top -- the goal -- was so close. It was within sight. The climbers who kept going upward past the deadline, made a decision to expend precious energy to get there, and then didn't have enough energy left, in the face of the weather change, to get back down.

Apparently something similar happened this year, resulting in more people dying on the way down.

More on this story can be found at these links:

Four Die on Mount Everest. CNN
Everest "Overcrowding" Warning After Four Die. NY Daily News
Is Mount Everest Like "a Morgue"? CNN

The Big Questions

1. What human values are in play when we take significant risks to succeed at something? In what activities of life are you driven by some form of "summit fever"? Does fulfilling personal goals have a place within the larger life of faith?

2. Some people who break the rules on Everest do get to the top and back down alive. What does our faith say about such pushing beyond boundaries of common sense the wisdom of those who've preceded us? How do the concepts of reward and risk enter into these decisions? Do you find it easier to give advice on setting limits than to actually follow them yourself? Why?

3. Is "counting the cost" a faith-practice? Why or why not? When have you achieved something through great effort or expense but later decided that the cost was too high? What was the cost?

4. Sometimes our push to achieve a goal is likely to impose a significant burden on others, or leave a mess for others to clean up. Are some goals so important that we should proceed anyway? How do we decide?

5. What are the arguments in favor of high-risk sports? Is it appropriate for religion to give its blessing for such endeavors? Since most things in life involve risk -- marriage, family, business, career -- who can decide on the appropriateness of such a blessing? Is this even a function or purpose of the Christian religion?

Confronting the News with Scripture
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

1 Kings 12:13
"The king answered the people harshly. He disregarded the advice that the older men had given him ..." (For context, read 12:1-19.)

When you choose to not abide by the advice of those in a position to know how to proceed, it's good to make sure your chosen path is likely to not make things worse. Rehoboam, the son of King Solomon of Israel, found this out the hard way. After Solomon died, Rehoboam presented himself for coronation in his father's stead, but before crowning him, the tribal leaders asked him to lighten the hard service Solomon had demanded from the people. Rehoboam sought advice from the wise men of his father's court, who recommended lessening the demands on the people. His buddies, however, told him to make even more demands! Sadly, Rehoboam listened to his inexperienced friends and quickly lost a major chunk of his realm. Ten of the 12 tribes withdrew from his leadership and formed their own nation, crowning another man king.

Questions: What measures do you use to evaluate the advice others give you? Do you ever ask advice only from those likely to tell you what you want to hear? If so, what is the outcome? When has someone asked your advice and ignored it? What was the result? When have you sought out a consultant of some sort with regards to your financial, medical, or recreational plans? What did you decide?

1 Kings 19:4
"But he himself went a day's journey into the wilderness, and came and sat down under a solitary broom tree. He asked that he might die: 'It is enough; now, O LORD, take away my life, for I am no better than my ancestors.'" (For context, read 18:17--19:18.)

Here's a case of the prophet Elijah "dying" on the way down. He had just had a major success. In a confrontation with some 450 prophets of the god Baal and 400 prophets of the goddess Asherah, Elijah, alone representing God, proved that his God was the only one with power. That's recorded in 1 Kings 18. But in chapter 19, Elijah is anything but pumped up from his resounding triumph. Hearing that Israel's queen, Jezebel, is after him, Elijah hightails it out of the area. Then, when he is safely away, all his energy leaves him, and he begins to feel sorry for himself. He has had it with being a prophet, and he wants to resign his commission. He is burned out, as evidenced by his words quoted above.

God is not about to let Elijah give up, however. The prophet goes to sleep, but God twice sends an angel to wake Elijah and give him food -- nourishment for what is to come. And then God directs Elijah to make a forced march to Mount Horeb, where God gives him more work to do: anoint new kings for Aram and Israel, and begin schooling a new prophet who will eventually be Elijah's successor. God doesn't sound very sympathetic, but what God orders Elijah to do works. God tells Elijah to get back to work, and Elijah does it. He goes on to labor successfully for God right up through his final hours on earth.

Questions: How do you tap into God's resources when your energy is low and your motivation nil? How do you discern the appropriateness of continuing? Is God more or less present, in your experience, in the "downhill" climb of your experiences? When things seem emptiest, does it even occur to you that God is present? Are you one to reach out to God in all seasons of life? Only when things are going well? Only when things are going poorly?

Luke 10:40
"But Martha was distracted by her many tasks; so she came to him and asked, 'Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to do all the work by myself? Tell her then to help me.'" (For context, read 10:38-42.)

This verse is from a "dying-on-the-way-down" story. Jesus was in the home of Mary and Martha, two sisters. Martha, wanting to be a good hostess, was going all out with "many tasks" to make the visit special for Jesus. But, the Bible says, she was "distracted" (the Greek word is perispao -- literally "dragged around") by these tasks. Here is the Son of God visiting in her home and she's worrying about whether she's put out enough towels! She expends her energy on the wrong things. Mary, however, recognized the priceless opportunity and sat at Jesus' feet, listening to what he had to say.

Martha, in her drive to be a good host, actually fails at it -- dies on the way down, if you will -- because she ends up snapping at her guest, "Don't you care that my sister has left me to do all the work by myself?" She also insults her sister in the process. We may be inclined to have sympathy for Martha; she's the one expending all the energy. But Mary is the one who is aware of the importance of the moment, makes the right choice and acts accordingly.

One of the lessons of Martha's story is the value of recognizing when, during preparation for anything -- from having house guests to cramming for an exam -- its time to say, "I've done all I can. It will have to suffice," and move on. "I could expend more energy and reach some kind of personal summit, but then not have enough personal resources left for the important things after that." Reserving some of our energy to spend on people is almost always a wiser move than expending it all on preparation or things or tasks. (On the other hand, spending time on things or tasks is often how we spend time in service to others.)

Question: Where has your life gotten out of balance in a way similar to how Martha's had? Was there someone available to help you prioritize the most needful things? Did you appreciate such help? Martha evidently took the advice of Jesus because when her brother Lazarus died, she made one of the strongest confessions of faith in Jesus found in Scripture (See John 11:27). What lessons have you learned on the "downward" journey that have strengthened your witness?

Luke 14:28
"For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not first sit down and estimate the cost, to see whether he has enough to complete it?" (For context, read 14:25-33.)

Jesus asked this rhetorical question in the context of a discussion about the cost of discipleship. He wanted people to follow him, but he also wanted them to have some realization of what they were getting into. Thus he used the metaphor of not building a tower without first "counting the cost." He used another metaphor about the wisdom of a king suing for peace when he realizes that he doesn't have sufficient armed might to wage war against an enemy.

Questions: Suing for peace is the equivalent of turning around on Everest and heading back down when the conditions make pressing upward foolhardy. In what situations have you counted the cost and then "sued for peace," turned back from a summit or revised your goals downward because of adverse conditions? What helped you decide that such was the right move?

1 Peter 1:24-25
"All flesh is like grass, and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord endures forever." (For context, read 1:13-25.)

So much of the challenge of life presents itself to us in terms of immediacy. Live for the day; carpe diem. And yet the Scriptures teach a different reality -- live for eternity -- and the lines above from Peter contrast the two.

Questions: In what ways does your involvement with the matters of daily living seem like climbing a mountain "because it is there"? Does working toward your goals ever interfere with your eternal commitments? How can you re-balance your life? Should the fact that life is transitory encourage one to take risks? Discourage you from doing so?

For Further Discussion

1. Do you have a "bucket list" of things you want to accomplish? What price are you willing to pay in terms of relationships and risk in order to accomplish some of these things? How long have you waited to accomplish these goals?

2. Respond to this: Beck Weathers was one of the climbers who survived that tragic 1996 climb up Everest, but just barely. Not too far from the top, but well above the last camp, Weathers' eyesight began to blur, an effect of the thin air and high altitude. He decided to stop where he was so as not to keep his comrades from summiting, and then have them pick him up on the way down. The problem, however, was that the storm arose in the meantime, delaying the group and killing some of those who were to come for him. Weathers got colder and colder, finally falling into a near-death coma. When someone did finally locate him, he was considered too far gone to help and simply left where he was. It was noted that one of his gloves was missing and that his hand and arm were frozen solid. His face was also horribly frostbitten. The attention was given to others who were deemed to have a chance at survival.

Weathers lay in the snow for hours like that, and then, surprisingly, he awoke, somehow got to his feet and staggered into Camp Four with the uncovered hand and arm frozen into a grotesque, raised position. From the camp, others who survived were able to eventually get him off the mountain. But he paid an awful price. The frozen hand and arm, as well as his frostbitten nose and the fingers of his other hand, had to be amputated. He's had a new nose constructed from flesh elsewhere on his body, but his hands are gone for good.

Interviewed much later, Weathers says that had he made it to the top and then safely back down, he would have probably lost his marriage and family. He had been so "summit-driven" in many areas of his life that he had stomped all over his personal relationships in the process. Had the climb been successful, he'd have probably kept going like that. But not making it to the summit and suffering the consequences he did caused him to re-evaluate what was going on in his life, and he has now put new energy into his personal relationships. He says that in a sense, he traded his fingers for his family but, on balance, thinks he got the better part of the bargain.

Responding to the News

This is a good time to watch for certain danger signs in our relationships: When we start treating those we love with a disregard or discourtesy we would never show to strangers, there's a good chance we are in a "dying-on-the-way-down" mode. Or when we repeatedly shunt their needs aside, it's likely we've got "summit fever."


Other News This Week

The World Watches Rare Annular Eclipse in Wonder

Millions around the world marveled at the images broadcast across the sky and the Internet last Sunday during a rare annular eclipse. (Annulus is Latin for "ring," which describes the circle of fire seen when the moon passes between the sun and the earth.) Experts say it will be 2071 before earthlings are treated to another solar eclipse this spectacular. Earlier this month a Super Moon, another unusual phenomenon in the heavens, appeared. Visions of such events capture the imagination and are fodder for both the scientist and the mystic. What do they mean for the Christian today?

For more, see:

Solar Eclipse Video. ABCNews
Annular Solar Eclipse Creates Ring of Fire. Wired
Supermoon Seen Behind Christ the Redeemer Statue. Yahoo! News

Psalm 104:19, 24
"You have made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting. ... O Lord, how manifold are your works! In wisdom you have made them all." (For context, read all of Psalm 104.)
Colossians 2:16-17
"Therefore do not let anyone condemn you in matters of food and drink or of observing festivals, new moons, or sabbaths. These are only a shadow of what is to come, but the substance belongs to Christ." (No broader context needed.)

Questions: When you view the sun and moon, stars and planets, do you tend to focus on creation, or on the Creator? In what sense do heavenly bodies serve as signs to point to something or someone beyond themselves?

Deuteronomy 4:19
"And when you look up to the heavens and see the sun, the moon, and the stars, all the host of heaven, do not be led astray and bow down to them and serve them, things that the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples everywhere under heaven." (For context, read 4:15-20.)

Questions: Is it appropriate for Christians to join with non-Christians in observing events such as the solar annular eclipse or the rising of a super moon? When might such observances dishonor God? How could they bring glory to God? How do such natural events differ from other common observances (e.g., Super Bowl, parades, etc.)?

James 1:17
"Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows." (No broader context needed.)

Questions: What can bodies and events in the heavens teach us about ourselves? About God and God’s ways?

Song of Solomon 6:10
"Who is this that appears like the dawn, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, majestic as the stars in procession?" (No broader context needed.)
Isaiah 60:19-20
"The sun shall no longer be your light by day, nor for brightness shall the moon give light to you by night; but the LORD will be your everlasting light, and your God will be your glory. Your sun shall no more go down, or your moon withdraw itself; for the LORD will be your everlasting light, and your days of mourning shall be ended." (For context, read 60:18-22.)

Questions: How would you answer the question posed by Song 6:10? What does it mean to you that “the Lord will be your everlasting light”?

Luke 21:25-28
"There will be signs in the sun, the moon, and the stars, and on the earth distress among nations confused by the roaring of the sea and the waves. People will faint from fear and foreboding of what is coming upon the world, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see 'the Son of Man coming in a cloud' with power and great glory. Now when these things begin to take place, stand up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near." (No broader context needed.)

Questions: Do signs in the heavens above strike fear in your heart, or bring you hope? Why can the believer stand in hope when viewing such amazing things above? How can you bear witness to hope to those in the world who feel anxiety and fear about these events?

You may wish to worship the Creator by singing a hymn such as "All Creatures of Our God and King," "Fairest Lord Jesus" ("Beautiful Savior") or "Earth and All Stars."

Closing Prayer

O God, help us in this life to benefit from the wisdom of those who have navigated the rough places. Help us as we work toward our goals to not mix up our priorities and miss the greater gifts of life, of time and of eternity. In Jesus' name. Amen.

Copyright 2012 Communication Resources

President Obama Declares Support for Same-Sex Marriage

President Obama Declares Support for Same-Sex Marriage

The Wired Word for May 20, 2012

In the News
 
"... this is a game changer for many people, to hear the president of the United States for the first time say that personally he has no objection to same-sex marriage."

That's what Robin Roberts, co-host of Good Morning America, said to President Barack Obama during an interview at the White House, broadcast on the program Monday. The president had just said that he'd "been going through an evolution on this issue," that he'd "always been adamant that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly and equally" and that he was no longer opposed to same-sex marriage. This was his first public statement in support of same-sex marriage.

"I've stood on the side of broader equality for the LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered] community," Obama said. "I had hesitated on gay marriage -- in part, because I thought civil unions would be sufficient -- that that was something that would give people hospital visitation rights and other elements that we take for granted. And I was sensitive to the fact that for a lot of people, you know, the word 'marriage' was something that evokes very powerful traditions, religious beliefs and so forth."

"But," the president continued, "I have to tell you that over the course of several years, as I talk to friends and family and neighbors, when I think about members of my own staff who are incredibly committed, in monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or Marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf -- and yet, feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is gone -- because they're not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point, I've just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married."

The president also told Roberts that while he now personally supports same-sex marriage, he doesn't want to nationalize the issue, leaving it instead to the states to work out, "because historically, this has not been a federal issue."

To that, Roberts pointed out that 30 states have now banned same-sex marriage. But Obama pointed to New York's recent legalization of it, and said he thought that state "did a good job in engaging the religious community --  making it absolutely clear that what we're talking about are civil marriages and civil laws." This means, said the president, that the New York law is "respectful of religious liberty, that … churches and other faith institutions are still going to be able to make determinations about what their sacraments are, what they recognize."

Reportedly, Obama had planned to make public his support for same-sex marriage later in the week during an appearance on the TV show The View, but last Sunday, on a morning talk show, Vice President Joe Biden said he was "absolutely comfortable" with the prospect of people of the same gender getting married, making his comment the first official word of support for same-sex marriage from the administration. In the interview with Roberts, Obama said Biden got "a little over his skis" with his statement, but also said that Biden did it out of a "generosity of spirit." The president stated that he had already made a decision that he would affirm the right of gays and lesbians to marry and was planning to do it in advance of the election. Thus, Biden's statement merely moved the timetable up slightly.

Obama's public acceptance of same-sex marriage joins two other actions of his administration to expand the privileges of  the LGBT community. Those include his ending the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy about homosexuals serving in the military and of his support for the Justice Department's decision to not defend the Defense Against Marriage Act (a 1996 federal law that defines marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman), calling it unconstitutional. Given these steps in support of gay rights, Andrew Sullivan, writing in the current issue of Newsweek, dubbed Obama "the first gay president," using the title in a symbolic sense, in the same way that John F. Kennedy has been called "the first black president" for his public support of civil rights.

More on this story can be found at these links:

The First Gay President. Newsweek
Robin Roberts ABC News Interview With President Obama. ABC News 
For Some, Same-Sex Marriage Is Not Politics, It’s Personal. New York Times
 
The Big Questions

1. President Obama spoke of same-sex marriage in terms of civil law (what government recognizes and sanctions). He differentiated it from what churches and religious institutions might recognize, sanction and consider a sacrament. That means that while a state might legalize same-sex marriage, a church in that state might not recognize such a union as marriage. Given that difference, how should a congregation whose denomination does not recognize same-sex marriage respond to a same-sex couple who attends after being legally married by the state? Whatever response you suggest, explain why that response might be considered Christian.

2. In every state in the union, heterosexual couples can choose to be married by either a civil or a religious authority. What different understanding of marriage is implied when couples choose to be married by a member of the clergy rather than by an officer of the state?

3. The president has characterized the matter of same-sex marriage in terms of fairness and equality (equal rights). The terms "fairness," "equality" and "rights" are used often in debates regarding governmental legislation. To what degree do they belong in the discussions about what the church will support? What, if any, are the religious or biblical equivalents of these three words?

4. Some branches of the church consider marriage a sacrament, by which they mean it makes present that which is sacred and holy. What happens when you apply the idea of sacrament to same-sex couples? Some churches consider marriage an ordinance, by which they mean it involves obedience to God's commandments. Some churches use neither term, but consider it a "holy estate." Which does your church observe? Does this make a difference when it comes to alternative definitions of marriage?

5. What are God's purposes in creating marriage? How are they fulfilled in marriage? How might they arguably be fulfilled in same-sex marriage?

Confronting the News with Scripture
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

Romans 1:26-27
"For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men ..." (For context, read 1:18--2:8.)

The Bible doesn't speak often about homosexuality, but it is difficult to see in what few references there are any support for homosexual behavior. The two verses above from the apostle Paul are among those most often cited by those who argue that homosexual behavior is sinful. It seems quite clear in these verses that Paul, at least, thought it was.

There are those who argue that such a reading of Paul's words and the other passages that refer to homosexual behavior misunderstands what was intended. (For one such argument, see My Take: What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality. CNN). We, however, think one must proceed very carefully whenever one starts arguing that the Bible isn't really saying what it seems plainly to say. Some would even say that such an argument is built on a slippery slope.

At the same time, we recognize that sincere Christians are strongly divided about how to understand homosexuality today. So if a Christian is to take a view on that subject different from what seems to be the biblical view, rather than argue that the Bible doesn't really say what it apparently says, that person does better to simply say why he or she thinks these particular references don't apply to the subject today. For example, one might argue that, in the case of the verses above, Paul was stating a personal, not a divine, viewpoint. Or one might argue that Paul was a citizen of the culture in which he lived and didn't have the benefit of a 21st-century understanding of human sexuality. Or one might argue that the Bible does not speak with one voice on this topic, and that other passages that urge compassion or justice override such verses as these from Paul. Or there may be other reasons suggested. Such arguments aren't likely to convince those who advocate a literal reading and timeless application of Scripture, but at least they don't try to subtract words from the Bible or nullify their obvious meaning.

In any case, these verses should not be used to condone mistreatment of homosexual people, for such action would be malicious, haughty and heartless, all of which Paul explicitly condemns in verses 28-31, which follow the ones quoted above.

Questions: To what degree does the Bible shape your views on social issues today? Why? Does the argument that a biblical view on a single topic may be out of sync with the times threaten the authority of the Bible as a whole? Why or why not? Has a biblical view ever been out of sync with the times in previous centuries? If so, what are some examples?

What movements against same-sex marriage today seem to be mean-spirited? What might Paul say about those?

Exodus 23:19
"You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk." (For context, read 23:18-19.)

This is one of the Jewish dietary laws, observed still by orthodox Jews today in their practice of not eating milk and meat together. We Christians, however, though we consider the Old Testament part of our Bible, don't "keep Kosher." Regarding Old Testament definitions of holiness, law and lifestyle, many Christians point to specific points, such as those concerning sexuality, but ignore questions of clean and unclean when it comes to foods that can be eaten. Many Christians mix meat and milk by eating something like beef stroganoff, or enjoy eating bacon and ham (Deuteronomy 14:8) or wear clothing made of different fabrics (Deuteronomy 22:11).

In the Old Testament polygamy is taken for granted. In New Testament times it seems to be a rarity or even nonexistent. The only possible injunction against it is a directive on the part of Paul that deacons ought to be married to only one wife, but that might suggest that they should not remarry after the death of a spouse. We don't practice polygamy at all and consider it a sin.

Question: How do we choose which biblical laws directly affect us, and which have been superseded or reinterpreted? As individuals? as a people? Why do we embrace biblical injunctions against various forms of sexuality, but not against other things that directly affect lifestyle?

If we, as Christians, have reinterpreted what seems to be lawful in Scripture, how, when or in what circumstances do we choose the collective wisdom of believers in reinterpreting other changes over time? Is reinterpretation something we do as individuals? as congregations? as denominations? as Christendom? Is Scripture study enough? Can one act solely on the basis of how one feels?

Lamentations 3:35-36
"... when human rights are perverted in the presence of the Most High, when one's case is subverted -- does the Lord not see it?" (For context, read 3:25-39.)

Interestingly, the Bible seldom uses the words "fairness" and "equality," but it does use "rights." Rights are not actually defined in the Bible, but in usage, the word seems to mean "one's just cause," or something that is owed to a person individually, to a group or to people in general. To pervert such human rights, as the verses above speak of, implies a refusal of justice.

Questions: In our time, the desire to marry a person of one's same gender is now being described as a right. Does that help in thinking about the subject? Why or why not?

Matthew 22:39
"You shall love your neighbor as yourself."  (For context, read 22:34-40.)

This statement from Jesus of the second of the two great commandments is so well known that it needs little commentary to explain it. But in the current discussion, it leaves room for the questions below.

Questions: The idea of loving our neighbor as our self often means acting for good on behalf of someone who is significantly different from us. Sometimes we can understand and sympathize with some of that difference when we "put our self in the other person's shoes." But if we are heterosexual ourselves, when the difference is in sexual orientation, we may have more difficulty finding a point of understanding and sympathy. Why? If we want to have the privilege of marriage for ourselves, does that require that we redefine marriage to include an arrangement between two people of the same sex? Why or why not?

Hebrews 13:4
"Let marriage be held in honor by all, and let the marriage bed be kept undefiled; for God will judge fornicators and adulterers." (For context, read 13:1-6.)

This statement is one of several admonitions about living the Christian life that the author of Hebrews includes in bringing his book to a close. His subject in the entire passage is the Christian life, and one of the things that he directs Christians to do was to hold marriage in honor.

Questions: The author was not thinking about same-sex marriage; rather, he was calling for marital faithfulness. Still, does the idea of holding marriage itself in honor have a bearing on our thinking about same-sex marriage today? If so, what bearing? How might someone with the other view on this controversy say that he or she is holding marriage in honor by his or her own position?

For Further Discussion

1. Some Christians are willing to support civil unions for same-sex couples, which would include all the rights and privileges that heterosexual couples have, but do not want this arrangement to be called "marriage." What is the difference? What is lost or gained by redefining marriage to include same-gender couples? Are heterosexual marriages harmed in any way when homosexual unions are declared to be marriages? If so, how?

2. Do you know any homosexual persons personally? If so, how does that acquaintance affect your view of same-sex marriage?

3. To what degree do your personal feelings -- quite apart from any religious or moral view -- affect your view of same-sex marriage? To what degree is it helpful to allow those feelings to influence your judgment about such unions? To what degree might it be harmful? Why? How have your opinions about homosexuality changed over time, in either direction, and what was the cause or impetus?

4. Are you aware of anyone (including yourself) whose opinions or beliefs about homosexuality have changed because of a sermon? a church directive? personal experience? discussion with others? Is this an issue in which people seem to be entrenched? Why do you think that studies seem to show that younger people of all religious and ethnic backgrounds accept the idea of homosexual marriage more easily than those who are older?

5. How did the early Christian Church leaders deal with various taboos of the time? Is there anything that is still a taboo in our society today? What are the implications for the church existing in the midst of a taboo-less society?

6. Is it consistent with one's Christian faith to support something as a legal right without supporting it as an option for Christians? Explain your answer.

7. Respond to this comment from a pastor: "Marriage is primarily a legal matter required by the state, not the Church, regarding protection of any children, property rights and inheritance, etc. Accordingly all people who live in committed relationships where money and property are shared should have equal rights under the law, including the right to medical info in sickness, and the home they share when one partner dies. ...  It is not a sin for anyone to fall in love with another person and want to build their lives and home together. However, hatred, rejection and harming another human are sins according to Jesus."

Responding to the News
 
This may be the right time to review our own position about same-sex marriage. Regardless of what conclusion we arrive at, it's good to remind ourselves that our Christian faith, love for God and love for neighbor should be at the root of all that we say and do about this subject.
 
Other News This Week

Aussies Mourn the Passing of the Angel of the Gap

Australian Don Ritchie, the man credited with preventing at least 160 suicides (and perhaps as many as 500) over a span of nearly half a century simply by extending a helping hand and a kind word, is being remembered following his recent death at age 86. The former sailor and life insurance salesman lived across the road from Jacobs Ladder near the Gap Park, where people sometimes contemplated jumping off a cliff to end it all. Ritchie would approach with a smile and ask if there was something he could do to help. His suicide-prevention tactics ranged from inviting people over for a cup of tea, a beer or breakfast and conversation back at the house to physically tackling someone.

Mr. Ritchie "challenged each of us to rethink what it means to be a good neighbor," Tam Johnston of the National Australia Day Council said. Don's daughter, Sue Ritchie Bereny, saw in her father a "strength with compassion" that served as a role model for her grandson.

Read more:

Death of the Angel of the Gap. Sydney Morning Herald
Australians Mourn Don Ritchie. The Telegraph
A Conversation Could Save a Life. Sydney Morning Herald (video)

Some Bible References:

Nehemiah 6:1
"... that I had built the wall and that there was no gap left in it ..." (For context, read 6:1-9.)
Ezekiel 22:30
"I looked for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand before me in the gap on behalf of the land so I would not have to destroy it, but I found none." (For context, read 22:23-31.)

Standing in the gap or filling in gaps in the wall around the city of Jerusalem were measures vital to the security of the nation of Israel.

Questions: How did Mr. Ritchie stand in the gap or fill gaps on behalf of people so they would not be destroyed? How has someone performed a similar function in your life? Have you ever built a strong wall of protection around someone who was vulnerable? How did you accomplish it? Is it possible to build walls of protection into our society that can protect people from themselves?

Matthew 10:42
"... and whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple -- truly I tell you, none of these will lose their reward." (For context, read 10:40-42.)

Question: There is a famous scene in the movie Ben Hur in which Jesus gives water to the nobleman-turned-slave. When have you experienced how something as simple as a cup of water, tea or beer, a smile or conversation had long-lasting transformative effects?

Acts 9:39
"All the widows stood beside [Peter], weeping and showing tunics and other clothing that Dorcas had made while she was with them ..."  (For context, read 9:36-42.)

Questions: When does a cup of water become the water of life that saves a life? When is clothing more than clothing? Even if you think you don't have much to offer, what simple thing could you do, give or say that could make all the difference in the life of someone who is hurting?

Luke 10:29, 33-37
"'And who is my neighbor?' ... But a Samaritan while traveling came near him; and when he saw him, he was moved with pity. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, having poured oil and wine on them. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said, 'Take care of him; and when I come back, I will repay you whatever more you spend.' Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers? He said, 'The one who showed him mercy.' Jesus said to him, 'Go and do likewise.'" (For context, read 10:29-37.)

Questions: How was Mr. Ritchie a neighbor to strangers on the edge of the cliff? Compare his attitude and actions to the Good Samaritan. How did Mr. Ritchie's attitude and actions compare with those of Jesus toward us?

Closing Prayer
 
Lord, make me an instrument of your peace. Where there is hatred, let me sow love. Where there is injury, pardon. Where there is doubt, faith. Where there is despair, hope. Where there is darkness, light. Where there is sadness, joy. O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console; to be understood as to understand; to be loved as to love. For it is in giving that we receive. It is in pardoning that we are pardoned, and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life. Amen. (The Prayer of St. Francis of Assisi, 1181-1226) 
 

Copyright 2012 Communication Resources

Freedom Tower Is Now Tallest Building in NYC

Freedom Tower Is Now Tallest Building in NYC

The Wired Word for May 6, 2012

In the News

One year after the killing of Osama bin Laden and more than 10 years after the terrorist attacks that brought down the twin towers of the World Trade Center, the site that became known as "Ground Zero" again boasts a skyscraper that is the tallest in New York City. When completed, the building, officially called One World Trade Center but often referred to by its former name, the Freedom Tower, will be the tallest in the country and one of the tallest in the world.

One World Trade Center is still under construction, but this week, the work in progress surpassed the height of the Empire State building, which is 1,250 feet, not counting its antenna. The Empire State building was the tallest skyscraper in the world when it was built in 1931, but lost that status when the North Tower of the World Trade Center was completed in 1972. After the 9/11 disaster, the Empire State building again was the tallest in the city.

The rising Freedom Tower will eventually top out at 1,776 feet, a height chosen by designers to commemorate the founding year of the United States. There's symbolism in another number as well: The roof will be at 1,368 feet, the same height as the original World Trade Center towers, with the final 408 feet in the form of a giant needle pointing skyward from the roof.

While there were no ceremonies to mark the milestone of surpassing the height of the existing tallest building in the city, some officials and commentators remarked on the symbolism of the rising structure. New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who represents Manhattan, commented that the new tower "serves as a beacon signaling our courage, our determination and our incredible resilience."

Writing for CNN, John Avlon, senior political columnist for Newsweek and The Daily Beast, noted that Lower Manhattan, where Ground Zero is located, is the fastest-growing residential neighborhood in the city. He said, "The Freedom Tower and the neighborhood springing up around it are testimonials to our continued commitment to an idea embodied by the firefighters who died there on 9/11: We have met the worst of humanity with the best of humanity. Where others have destroyed, we will build. And we will endure."

While the new tower will be the tallest in the Western Hemisphere, it won't be the tallest in the world. That title is held by the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, at 2,717 feet, followed by the Mecca Royal Hotel Clock Tower in Saudi Arabia at 1,972 feet.

Begun in 2006, One World Trade Center is scheduled for completion next year, at a projected cost of $3 billion. The skyscraper will have 104 floors, 71 of them for office space. There will also be levels for retail, dining, observation, mechanical services for the building and other uses. The building has been designed to be significantly less vulnerable to possible future attacks.

More on this story can be found at these links:

The Freedom Tower, Rising From Ashes. CNN 
It's Official: 1 World Trade Center Is Now New York's Tallest Skyscraper. New York Daily News
One World Trade Center. SkyscraperPage.com
World Trade Center official website (includes video of the construction in progress)
 
The Big Questions

1. Is erecting a new "super tall" tower an appropriate use for the Ground Zero site? Is it "inviting" new attacks? Why or why not? (Bear in mind that the area also includes other new -- though shorter -- towers, as well as a 9/11 museum and memorial reflecting pools.) What spiritual lessons may be drawn from the rebuilding?

2. Where can national pride and Christianity walk hand in hand? Where must Christianity take a different path from national pride?

3. Some people, after tragedies strike, become advocates regarding the issue that was prominent in the tragedy -- alcohol, guns, disease, safety issues, terrorism, etc. What advocacies did the 9/11 tragedy engender? How do those advocates help others today?

4. As a human race, we seem "wired" to somehow rebound after tragedy -- to heal, to let the scar tissue make us stronger. But as individuals, many respond differently. Some seem stuck in the loss. What role does faith play in recovery? How do we tap into faith's recovery resources? What is the connection between faith and resilience? To what degree is resilience a spiritual value?

5. What role do buildings and other physical structures play in religious life? How might Christianity be different if we had no houses of worship? What impact do our church buildings have on living a holy life? On witnessing about our faith? On being a center of mission?

Confronting the News with Scripture
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

Haggai 1:3-4
"Then the word of the LORD came by the prophet Haggai, saying: Is it a time for you yourselves to live in your paneled houses, while this house lies in ruins?" (For context, read 1:1-12.)

The people of God had been back from the disaster of the Babylonian exile about 16 years. Early on, they had begun work on the Lord's temple, but stopped long before the task was finished (see Ezra 4:24). The prophets Haggai and Zechariah both encouraged the people to return to the task (see Ezra 5:1-2). The people did, and the new temple rose from the ruins.  

Questions: How necessary is it to rebuild what has been destroyed? There was a great deal of delay, argument and indecision prior to the beginning of the restoration of the Ground Zero site. What, in your opinion, delayed rebuilding? What sorts of restorations have you hesitated to undertake? Why?

Genesis 11:4
"Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves; otherwise we shall be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth." (For context, read 11:1-9.)
Ezra 3:11
"And all the people responded with a great shout when they praised the LORD, because the foundation of the house of the LORD was laid." (For context, read 3:10-13.)

We are quoting these verses from Genesis and Ezra together because they provide a balance when talking about how God views human construction projects. In the case of the Genesis text, God disapproves of the tower of Babel, apparently because the building of it was a rebellion against his command to spread out over the land. The people wanted to "make a name" for themselves in one city, where the tower would be an emblem of their greatness. God halted the construction by "confusing" their language so that the builders could not understand each other.

The Ezra verse tells of the great shout of praise from the Jewish returnees from Babylonian exile when the foundation was laid to rebuild the Jerusalem temple, the one that the  Babylonians had destroyed years earlier. Here, God's point of view is not expressly mentioned, but it's clear from the context and the whole story that this construction project has God's blessing.

Questions: What differences in these two biblical construction projects account for the different responses from God? What might be God's view of the Freedom Tower project? Would it be more like that toward the tower of Babel or that toward the temple rebuilding? Why? Is the business likely to be conducted in the new Freedom Tower emblematic of American values in a way similar to how the sacrifices made in the temple were emblematic of ancient Israel's values?

Isaiah 9:2
"The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who lived in a land of deep darkness -- on them light has shined." (For context, read 9:1-7.)

In its original context, this is a verse about national recovery. Isaiah was probably talking about the coronation of Hezekiah as king of Judah. Hezekiah was a good king who served the Lord, unlike his immediate predecessor, Ahaz. From the early days of the church, however, Christians have understood a greater meaning in this text, seeing it as a prophecy about the coming of the Messiah, Jesus.

Thus, while Isaiah's original audience heard his words as announcing a king who would bring about national recovery, Christians hear them as announcing a king who brings spiritual recovery and the kingdom of God.

But we can also read Isaiah's words in the context of what's happening in our personal or national life. On 9/11, we became a people walking in deep darkness. Can we now view the rising tower as emblematic of shining light, national recovery?

Question: Why do you think "recovery" is a dominant biblical theme? Name a restoration that has occurred in your life or in the life of your church. What restoration is waiting for a spark in order for renewal to begin? How long have you been waiting?

Ezekiel 36:35
"This land that was desolate has become like the garden of Eden; and the waste and desolate and ruined towns are now inhabited and fortified." (For context, read 36:33-36.)

Ezekiel was a priest in Judah who was forced into exile in Babylonia along with many of his fellow Jews during one of the early deportations after the Babylonians invaded Judah. In Babylonia, Ezekiel became God's spokesperson to the exiles. He foresaw the destruction of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians, and much grief for the people as a result. But Ezekiel also saw a vision of God’s restoration of the nation, and this verse about the desolate land becoming like the garden of Eden is part of his prophecy about the renewal of Judah and the people of Israel.

To any who saw the destruction on 9/11 -- or photos of it -- such words as "waste and desolate and ruined" clearly fit. The area is now inhabited and the new building is fortified in ways that the former towers were not.

Questions: This verse from Ezekiel was written for another time and place, and behind it was the understanding that no matter what recovery the nation experienced, God was the prime mover of that recovery. Is it appropriate to understand God as the prime mover in our national recovery? Why or why not?

1 Corinthians 13:13
"And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three ..." (For context, read 13:1-13.)

The New Testament in Modern English (by J.B. Phillips) words this verse, "In this life, we have three great lasting qualities -- faith, hope and love." Those three qualities are what, if one is anchored in God, can remain after the agony and pain of tragedy have burned away. At the end of Ernest Hemingway's book, A Farewell to Arms, is this: "The world breaks everyone, then some become strong at the broken places."

Questions: How do Christian faith, hope and love help us to become "strong at the broken places"? What part does each of the three -- faith, hope and love -- play in recovery from tragedy and despair? In what order have you experienced these?

For Further Discussion
 

1. Respond from a Christian faith perspective to John Avlon's comment: "The Freedom Tower and the neighborhood springing up around it are testimonials to our continued commitment to an idea embodied by the firefighters who died there on 9/11: We have met the worst of humanity with the best of humanity. Where others have destroyed, we will build. And we will endure."

2. Respond to this, from a TWW team member: "The Freedom Tower has had a history of conflict, of competing interests all vying for their piece of the action, as has much of the nation. But in the end, it speaks to the unity that comes from the conflict of diversity. E pluribus unum, 'Out of many, one.' Many opinions, expressed in one symbol, speaking for all. No dictator ordering the design, but out of many voices, one symbol."

3. Sometimes, after a church burns down, whether by accident or as the result of malice, a congregation uses the loss to reevaluate its needs -- the way it can serve its community --  and reprioritizes its ministries. For example, we know of a case in Indiana where the building of a Church of the Brethren congregation burned to the ground one night. The next morning the pastor received a call from a neighboring pastor who told her that this could turn out to be the best thing that happened to her congregation. The congregation discussed whether to rebuild on the old site, or to move. The first vote was even, so they went back to a time of self-study. After a second vote, the congregation bought land, built a large, single-story building that was handicap accessible, able to accommodate modern technology and opened up new avenues for ministry. Should it take a disaster to cause us to reevaluate and redirect our energies? Under what "normal" circumstances could we examine our call from Christ and allow ourselves to be free from the constraints of our historical situation? What do you make of this statement: "First you build a building, then the building builds you"?

3. One team member said that certain Bruce Springsteen songs, including "My City In Ruins,"  "Wrecking Ball" and "We Take Care of Our Own," speak from a secular standpoint to this story of resilience and recovery. (For copyright reasons, we cannot quote the lyrics, but they are available at the links provided.) What church songs or hymns speak about spiritual recovery?

4. What does the new tower symbolize to you? How important is symbolism for national recovery from the 9/11 attacks? Why? How important is it in the face of current national circumstances, including the state of the economy? Does this mean America is "rising" again? How might the new tower affect the national mood?

Responding to the News
 
This is a good time to remind ourselves that national pride and a commitment to follow Jesus are not the same thing. Our faith is a lens through which to examine other parts of our lives.

Closing Prayer
 
Thank you, O Lord, for the ability to recover, both as a people and as individuals. Bless our nation, we pray. Help us not to let national pride blind us to where we need to change how we interact with other nations. In Jesus' name. Amen.
  

Copyright 2012 Communication Resources