CoffeeNBagodoughnuts

Colleges and Universities

Schools

Christian Glitter by www.christianglitter.com

My claim to fame is that I am the published author of one book, and I am working on four more. The first is an interpretation of the Gospel of St. Mark. The published version can be found at Amazon.com and is titled, Travels with Brother Retter. The updated version will be called Travels with Brother Delvery. I am also working on interpretations of St. Matthew, St. Luke and the Acts. Please feel free to check out the first several chapters of my interpretation of St. Mark on my blog page.

At one time I was a conservative. Then I enlisted in the service and was placed under a Senior Chief Theodore (Gift of God) Bronson, an extreem conservative Catholic who felt that people like me had no place in his Navy. One of the things this man did was give me a special evaluation, which of course rated me as blow standard, for a 30 day period I was on leave and 3,000 miles away from the command and his view. Another, was giving a substandard rating for a period when he did not give me any work to do. I had plenty of work to do. Friendly officers in other departments gave me work to do, at my request. The Senior Chief claimed that he constantly watched what I was doing. Even though he said not a word, based on the fact he was watching me he gave me the rating, Needs constant supervision.

I saw a lot of myself in that man. I saw so much of myself in him that as I underwent his abuse, I resolved that I had to re-evaluate all of my values. Part of this procss involved looking at the Ten Commandments to try and find out how what he was doing was justified. As I did so, this 18 year old found out that in Deuteronomy 5 and in Exodus 20 there are not 10 commandments, but 15.

Already confused, I became more confused. My mother taught me that there was a book of wisdom that the Jews had that explained all his stuff, so I went to the Jewish community to learn the answers to my questions. There I learned that the first commandment is not "You will have no other gods." but "It is not to you fathers that I give these commands, but to you who are here today. "Remember, I am God who rescued from the land of opression and from the land of menial labor."

To truly remember is to remember what it is like to be oppressed and to remember your rescue. Now I had something I could hang on to. I was oppressed and when I left the command I was rescued. I then remembered that as this is the founding premise of Jewish national identity. This is why the Hebrew word for Justice and the Hebrew word for Charity are the same word, Tzadic. If justice is remembering what it is like to be oppressed, remembering the rescue, getting a knot in our stomach and taking action when we see others hurting, justice and charity are in fact the same concept. Likewise,as Americans we have a similar national identity:

Christian Glitter by www.christianglitter.com

  Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame, With conquering limbs astride from land to land; Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame. "Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" Emma Lazarus, 1883  

 

I am reminded of Exodus 1:8-10

Then a new king, who knew nothing of Joseph, came to power in Egypt. He said to his subjects, "Look how numerous and powerful the Israelite people are growing, more so than we ourselves! Come, let us deal shrewdly with them to stop their increase; otherwise, in time of war they too may join our enemies to fight against us, and so leave our country."

Now just what did this new king tell the Jews? How did he deal shrewdly with them?

The text does not say, but it is implied. In the very start of the passage, Exodus 1:1 it says, "These are the names of the sons of Israel who, accompanied by their households, migrated with Jacob into Egypt:" The implication is that the Joseph and company made a choice to go to Egypt, so Pharaoh had permission to abuse them. Is this not so much like the republicans of the past quarter century who said the poor deserve what they have because they made their choices?

The second reason is found in Genesis 47:5. "They may settle in the region of Goshen." Now Goshen is a Delta, swamp land and they were putting sheep on it. It could not have been long before the sheep tore the land up. Then Pharaoh could say, "See, I have you the best of the land and you destroyed it. You have shown that you cannot take care of what we gave you, so we are taking it away and workng you to replace what you have destroyed." Does this not sound like the republicans of the past quarter century and their complaints that the poor misuse the welfare they are given?

The last reason for the oppression is found in Genesis 46:34, "'We your servants, like our ancestors, have been keepers of livestock from the beginning until now,' in order that you may stay in the region of Goshen, since all shepherds are abhorrent to the Egyptians." The Jews had the wrong vocation, the wrong job, which they of course chose. Therefore the Egyptians had the right to abuse them. Does this not sound like the complaints of the republicans of the past quarter century with their complaints that the poor choose their lot in life and could choose other vocations. After all they have to do is spend money they do not have to attend colleges they cannot afford to earn degrees in these colleges that their high schools did not prepare them for.

To this, God told Moses, "Hold on Moses, I want to give these people swimming lessons."

Still, there is the story about the crossing of the Red Sea:

"God is not happy at the downfall of the wicked. ... When the angels tried to sing songs of praise to God at the Red Sea, God silenced them: 'My handiwork, my human creatures, are drowning in the sea and you want to sing a song of praise?'" (T.B. Megillah 10b)

Likewise, "If your enemy falls, Do not celebrate. If he trips, Let not your heart rejoice." (Proverbs 24:17)

This is not the first time the conservatives attacked me without cause. True, in this case I was a brash young kid at the time. Leadership is about taking brash young kids and molding them into future positive citizens. Senior Chief, because of his conservative values, failed in this goal. He is not the first, and he most certainly is not the last. It was a conservative Ruth Storeman, an Employment Security Referee who told me that "Sponsoring and encouraging harassment in the workplace is a perfectly normal and legitimate business practice. Therefore your witnesses to harassment are not admitted." This was at the same time Uncle Tom Clarence was being pushed through the US Senate. It was a conervative EEOC referee named Gale Dupree who told my wife, "Freedom of Speech and Religion may well be in the Constitition, but it is not backed up in law, therefore your husband's employer had the right to fire him because they found out he is a democrat and a Catholic."

Still, there is no room for rejoicing in the suffering of others, no matter what the excuse and no matter how much we may think they deserve it. We must remember, God tells Abel, It is my blood ("Dami" first person singular posessive) of your brother that calls to me from the ground. In Genesis 1 it says, God made man in his image and in his likeness, ("Damoth" feminine plural.) I was oppressed by the conservatives and their backword policies. That does not give me permission to oppress conservatives. On the contrary, it gives me the obligation to make sure that all people, conservative and liberal, black, white and Hispanic, gay and straight, enslaved by poverty and by wealth, are treated as people who have the image of God running through their vains, because they do.

Whenever I think about my problems I need to remember all the other people who have problems. I need to remember the 1.2 million Iraqi citizens who lost their lives so that the conservatives in this country could have their oil. quot;I looked for judgement but found violence.quot; I need to remember the 4,000 plus US souldiers who lost their lives for the same goal. "I looked for judgement but found violence.quot;I need to remember the 2,000 who lost their lives in New Orleans so that the rich could have their Bush/ McCain tax cuts. I looked for charity, Tzadic, and behold a cry. I need to remember the 30,000 people who die in this country every year so that members of the National Rifle Association, along with evey common criminal and person with mental illness can have their play toys. quot;I looked for judgement and found violence.quot; I also need to remember the 700,000 post born babies in the US who lose their lives every year, so that the rich can have their Reagan/ Bush tax cuts. I looked for charity, Tzadic, and behold a cry. I need to remember the approximately 31 million Americans, including more than 14.5 million children in America, who go to bed hungry every night so the rich can have their 6 digit incomes. I looked for charity, Tzadic, and behold a cry.

Yes, the pro-life claims of the conservatives are at best a sick perverse joke. They brag that they are pro-life, but all I see is dead bodies, everywhere. Still, I am called to promote life and life to its fullest, Deuteronomy 30: 11-19, John 10:10, That includes the pre-and the post born, conservative and liberal, rich and poor, enslaved by poverty and free. In the case of Deuteronomy 30, there is a command to choose life. Even if the fetus is only potential life, I am called to move potential life to life and life in its fullest. All people pre-and post-born are people with potential. As liberals we are called to move potential to actual. That goes for workers and housewives, black, brown, red and white.

MySpace Comments & MySpace Layouts
 

Luke 1:13 also has something to say about this.

When Jesus quotes the greatest commandment he quotes Deuteronomy 6:4-9. In the Hebrew, When Jesus says, "Love God with All your Hearts," the word for heart is plural and the word for your is singular. In the Jewish gloss it gives two reasons for this. We remember as a community and we each have many inclinations. Some of these are good and some are not good. Abusers point to the latter when they abuse us. >
Jewish tradition says we are called to love God with both our good and our bad inclinations. We are calld to take our faults and turn them into positives. After all, God does not make junk, unless you consider conservatives and republicans. Remember these are faults, and these faults can be turned into positives.

There is a common ground between the liberals and the conservatives. Both want pro-life for somebody. The question is, "Who are they willing to sacrifice to get it?" The liberals want to throw out the pre-born baby, and the conservatives want to throw out the mother. Because of conservative republican greed, (that is why the call it the GOP [greedy old politicians] the conservatives also want to throw out the father. They are against a minimum wage that is related to the living wage, They are against due process in the work place and in the regular judicial process. They are against regulations that make sure the working environoment is a safe place to work, free from environmental and verbal abuse type pollution. Which side is right? Which side is more important? In James 2:8-10 we have our answer:

if you fulfill the royal Torah according to the writings, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you commit error, and are convicted by the Torah as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law, but falls short in one particular, has become guilty in respect to all of it.

How do we love God? By loving his property. What is God's property? God's property is everything that exists, including the environment. What is God's most valuable property? In the story of Cain and Able, in the Hebrew it says, "It is my blood of your brother that calls to me from the ground." God's more valuable property is life. In Deuteronomy 30 we are presented with the command to choose life. God's most valuable property then is human life. In John 10:10 we are called to live life to its fullest.

In the Gospel of John chapter 21: 15-17 we have another answer. In Jewish tradition it is said that the temple was to have no stairs. If there are stairs there is a place to stop and rest. If there are only ramps there is no place to stop and rest. One must be going up or down. In this Gospel, Jesus asks, "Do you love me with an ever present transforming love." Peter, son of God is Gracious says, "You know that we are friends." Jesus says, "Even if that is all you have, feed my sheep." Jesus asks a second time, Do you love me with an ever present transforming love." Peter again answers with Peter, son of God is Gracious says, "You know that we are friends." Jesus answers with, "Feed my lambs." Jesus asks a third time with, "Are we friends." If Peter is not willing to rise to the level of transforming love, he must therefore backslide." This is why the passage says Peter is hurt by the question. Jesus then says, "Feed my sheep." How do we show we love God? "Feeding his sheep and his lambs," his planet. It is not enough to just be friends. The love must be a transforming love that reaches and to heal and transform the world and each person in it.

It is worth noting that some think that the solution to the abortion problem is strict constructionist judges, mean sprited laws that declare women with unwanted pregnancies to be guilty of murder, and constitutiional amendments that declare that conservative men have the right to tell other people how to lead their lives. I cannot disagree more. Such has been done to me. I think Jesus came with an alternate plan

 

There is the story of King David taking Jerusalem. At the time the king of the city was attacking the Israeli people, in particular their women and children. To this, King David called his three best generals and asked them how to take the city and get even. Two of King David's finest generals came forward and advised a frontal assault on the city. True, they would lose most of the army, but they could take the city and get even. The third general, a man by the name of Joab came up with an alternate plan. He advised that King David publically say that he could ot stop the King of Jerusalem from his violence so it would be allowed to continue. King David would then remove the bulk of his troops from the battle area. Joab and a select group of a few thousnad commandos would go under the city and through the water cisterns there, come up into the city, take the armory and the entrance to the city gates. King David agreed to this plan. The rest is history. Jerusalem recently celebrated 4,000 years of Judeo-Christian/ Muslem history.

 

So is the history of our problem. The solution is not continued repeated frontal attacks with strict constructionist judges, mean sprited laws that declare women with unwanted pregnancies to be guilty of murder, and constitutiional amendments that declare conservative men have the right to tell other people how to lead their lives. The solution is a different way. It is worth noting that in none of the gospels does Jesus quote the law to the masses.He never says, "In the Torah it says this... You will do this and you will not do that." The only individual Jesus does that with is the devil. The only group Jesus does that with is the first century republicans, the group of the establishment of his day, the pharisees. Even in the Sermon on the Mt. Jesus does not say, "The Torah says this..." or "The Torah says that... Instead he says, "You have heard what was said... but I say..." "The solution is the Gospel.

 

It is worth noting that in the story of the paralytic Mark 2: 1-12 the sin of the paralytic is not mentioned. I think it is because the child is the victim of child abuse and his sin is no more than anyone elses. What paralyses the child therefore is not sin, but guilt. That being the case, to be heaed, the child must not only believe that Jesus has the authority to forgive sins, but that he has the abiltiy to create the paralytic's world in such a way that the things he tried in the past, but which failed, will be successful in the future. That is not something Jesus can do. On the other hand, it is what he calls us to do and that is what the Gospel is all about.

 

MySpace Comments & MySpace Layouts

The Gospel of St. Mark chapter 7 has the related story of the gospel. This is the question of eating with unwashed hands. The key line in the passage is where Jesus says, It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles, but what comes out. The key word in this sentence is the Greek word generally translated as defiles. The Greek word is Koine and it literally means to make common. The opposite of to make common is to make special. In Jewish thought, the purpose of the dietery laws, and some other laws was to make Jews special in the sight of God. Jesus came with a new message. It is not what one eats or does not eat that makes one special. It is not adherence to strict constructionist interpretations of the law that make one special. Treating other people as special and letting them treat us as special, members of the human and Christian communities that makes us special. Further, it is this being special, that all humans are special simply because they have within themselves the Dam(blood) and the Damoth (the likeness of God) that is the essence of the Gospel.

 

That is my statement of values! Please join me in the pursuit of making it happen.

 

On Friday, September 14, 2007, ORB (Opinion Research Business), an independent polling agency located in London, published estimates of the total war casualties in Iraq since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.[1] At over 1.2 million deaths (1,220,580), this estimate is the highest number published so far, outnumbering even the death toll of the recent Rwandan genocide.

 

For Gun related deaths each year:

 

http://college.hmco.com/english/resources/research_guide/2e/resources/case_study.html

 

For Infant mortality rates: http://www.biologynews.net/archives/2006/05/08/us_infant_mortality_rate_fails_to_improve.html for poverty quote: http://www.cicvc.org/newscircle.htm the website of the Central Indiana Corporate Volunteer Council. My Gun Control Idea

 

The root concept of my idea is to make the purchase of guns and gun related supplies as difficult as possible for criminals and as easy as possible for legitimate gun owners. For myself, I am a Secular Franciscan and Secular Franciscans are by definition pacifists. We do not own guns. I am also from a working class family from Appalachia where everyone believes in gun ownership. Therefore I know the folly of attacking their perceived rights. So here is my idea:

 

A person could get a good citizenship endorsement on their drivers license. A driver could ask for a class A, B or"C endorsement. A class A endorsement would certify that the driver had a full and complete background check. There is no criminal record or record of mental illness in their background. The class B endorsement would only certify that the driver has no criminal record. As the endoreement has a function within it to make sure the drivers license holder is in fact the person who properly goes with the card, the finger scan, any person with a credit card might want the endorsement. Part of any credit card transaction might also include scanning the drivers license along with the credit or debit card. If either card is hot, the machine could be told to confiscate both cards. Stealing identities could become a thing of the past.

 

Employers wanting to certify that a perspective employee has no criminal record and is therefore qualified to handle money might require at least a class B license. In some cases they might require the A endorsement. In Nevada, the class A and B endorsements might double as a gaming card. Because of this double use of the endorsement, the endorsement would not in any way be an indication that the holder owns guns or desires to own guns.

 

To get the endorsement, the driver would have to ask for the background check. They would not be allowed to stipulate if they wanted the A B or C endorsement. They would have to submit a copy of their birth certificate with footprints and the appropriate form. There would be little to no fee. A person needing the endorsement for a job might not have the money for any fee.

 

To purchase guns, ammunition, or accessories the person would need the class A endorsement. There would be no need for a waiting period. The purchaser had their waiting period when they waited for their endorsement. Guns usually used for hunting would not need to be registered. Only about 4 percent of gun crimes use these guns anyway. This is the piece of steak thrown out to get gun owners on board the plan. Semi-automatic guns and hand guns would need to be registered. Automatic guns would be banned.

 

The process of purchasing a gun would be as follows. The purchaser would need to have the class A endorsement. They would have to submit to a thumb scan to compare their fingerprint with the fingerprint in a master database to make sure the drivers identity was not stolen. They would register their gun if required. They would walk out the door with their purchase. Easy.

 

If a person stole a gun and wanted ammunition, they would not have the endorsement. They would not be able to buy ammunition for a stolen gun. It would be worthless to them.

 

This is my idea, what do you think?

 

My Due Process Idea/ My working from the bottom up idea

 

This idea is based upon a quote in the Second Treatise on Government by John Locke, Chapter 2 The State of Nature: section 13:

 

It is unreasonable for Men to be Judges in their own Cases, that Self-love will make Men partial to themselves and their Friends. Ill Nature, Passion, and Revenge will carry them too far in punishing others. Nothing but Confusion and Disorder will follow...Absolute Monarchs are but men ..."

 

I would add that the Corporate CEO, company owner, and Union Chief are but Monarchs of private enterprise. I would also like to add that it was Montesque who took this principle and developed the Tripartite system of government that is the foundation of our Constitution. Therefore, to argue that the system of checks and balances that had at one time existed between the union and the corporation needs to be removed, is not only to argue for a corporate monarch, it is also to argue that the US Constitution is out of date and needs to be removed. This is unpatriotic , facist, and revolutionary in the nth degree.

 

The chimerical argument of these people is that some thirty years ago the system was out of balance. It is alleged that even though at its height union members were only a quarter of the population, and that now the figure is only half of this, that unions had too much power. These people point to alleged abuses on the part of unions that allowed employees to remain employed that otherwise would have lost their jobs.

 

The truth is that there is only one reason such employees would have kept their jobs. Due process prevailed. The managers in these cases did not keep acurate records that would allow them to back up their claims. It needs to be pointed out that in Deuteronomy 5, when it says, Do not bear false witness, the word for false is the same word used for vein used in Do not take Gods name in vein. Vein witness, true or false is witness that cannot be backed up. Where there is due process, the word of management is no more important than anyone elses. Management has to back up its claims, just like everyone else, and they do not like that. They would rather be the despotic monarch with the unregulated power over life and death.

 

The fact is that workers are not helped when unproductive and unsafe workers are allowed to keep their jobs. Unsafe workers are not only a threat to themselves but to all of those who are around them, and this includes all of their fellow union co-workers. Unproductive workers drain the profits from the corporation that would otherwise at least partly go to wage increases. Ir is therefore to their interest to remove unproductive and unsafe workers. When management and labor work together, labor will provide the witnesses to remove unproductive and unsafe workers.

<div"> All too often, the complaint from management about unions is the provision in the labor contract that prevents management from subcontracting or farming out work to cheaper companies, generally in other countries. The fact that management has been allowed to do this is the reason salaries are dropping, housing values are dropping, healthcare and retirement are becoming things of the past, workers work harder and harder for less and less and most Americans look at the 1960s, when unions were strong with nostalgia.

 

Even if the charge were true, it would only more prove my case. If the charge were true it would be proof that the system was, at one time out of balance. The democratic solution is to bring the system back into balance. That means a discussion between the parties to discuss whether or not the system is out of balance, and if so, how to bring it back into balance. Pro-managemnt types have repeately been opposed to this solution. If there is 25 lbs worth of weight on one side of a scale and only a 20 lbs worth of weight on the other side, the solution is not to remove the whole 25 lbs worth of weight as the pro-management, anti-union people propose. If you do so, the system that was 5 lbs out of balance will now be 20 lbs out of balance and that is exactly what has happened since 1980 when the republians took over. This neo-mercentile solution is their solution to the problem. It shows a blatant disregard for the integrety of human life as it allows management to treat workers as less than human, and to in some case, force workers to work in mentally and physically unhealthy and unsafe working conditions.

 

It is sad to say, but so called pro-life peaple join the republicans in this endeavor. Some 5000 plus workers lose their lives every year to worker related accidents and the so called pro-life people simply do not care. This is more dead bodies like I reported above. Democrats favor a bottom up theory of management. This is a theory that emphasizes experience over text book learning and hands on over bottom line accounting principles by staff people who do not know the business they are running. All workers want is a say in the way they live their lives. They want to live their lives to their fullest as promised in the Gospels, John 10:10. The so called pro-lifers want to top down theory of management where workers do not have a voice in the way they live their lives, and where workers are but cogs in the profit making wheel. In the plan being presented, experience meets bottom line accounting. Both sides have a say in the working of the corporation. This makes the corporation stronger and life fuller for the workers. This is the pro-life understanding of pro-life. For democrats, pro-life is pro-life for all people where pro-life means life lived to its fullest. For all liberals pro-life means pro-life as starting at conception, or at least birth and continuing on until natural death. For the republicans and so called pro-life people, pro-life is pro-life from conception until natural birth. For the rest of the masses it is subsistance living. True life, life lived to its fullest is reserved for a couple of rich guys from Texas.

 

To bring back the system of checks and balances that has existed in the past between the union and the corporation, I would make a change in Taft/ Hartley. There would be a legal distinction between a labor union and a guild. A guild would be a labor union with civic and professional standards and training in those standards. I have in mind the Navy distinction of military standards and professional standards in rate. The military standards are what make you a good sailor. The professional standards are hat make you a good hospital corpsman or radarman or whatever. In the case of my distinction, civic standards are what would make you a good citizen. Professional standards are what would make you a good carpenter or whatever.

 

Under my plan, a guild would not be subject to the constraints of Taft Hartley. Translation, to be able to enforce its standards and training in its standards, all guilds would be closed shop. I am aware that 90% of unions would become guilds in the first year of this legislation becoming law.

 

The federal government would help to fund the education programs of the guilds. Guilds would have the advantage of quality education. If an employer funds a training program, an employee becomes more marketable and therefore more able to leave the employer. If the guild trains an employee, even if he changes employers, he remains a member of the guild.

 

It was John Locke who said that no person is a valid judge in his own case. The Second Treatise in Government. That is why our government has executive, legislative and judicial branches and that is why our legislative branch has two houses. The same concept applies to employers. They need a check and balance to make sure they do not hurt themselves, their employees and their customers. As you can read from the above, I have been the victim of employer abuses. If these abuses did not happen, I would still be working at each of the places I worked in the past. What was short in these places was due process, a legal representative who protected my interests. This proposal furnishes that representation. Republicans are of course opposed to this idea. We need look no further than Gitmo in Cuba to know that the republicans are opposed to due process.

 

Because the guild would be responsible for standards and training in those standards, they would be asked to have their own system of due process, including trial by their peers. To avoid the possibility of guild management replacing employer management, guild management, guild officials could not be jurers in guild trials. If a member was in violation of guild standards, they could be suspended from the guild. For example, if they engaged in shoddy or unsafe practices, they could be suspended for a time from the guild. If it was found that they crossed a union or guild picket line, they could be suspended. If a members own guild went on strike and that member crossed the picket line, they could be suspended from the guild for a period after the strike ended, subject to du process. The guild could consider hardship cases.

 

The guild would have the traditional levels of growth. A person would start as a novice and would have to be at least a novice to be employed in a closed shop. There would be a maximum period of time that a person could be a novice. After completed entry level coursework, the novice would become an apprentice. After becoming skilled in his craft, he would become a journeyman. As in the Navy, after some period of time, the seaman becomes a petty officer, then a chief, a master craftsman. As a master craftsman, the chief is capable of running his own department. As a master craftsman, a person would qualify to set up his own business. The guild would be allowed to give loans and other aid necessary in setting up that business. Some of this help could include help in advertising. This could include as little as the new business being able to put up signs saying that the owner is a mastercraftsman supported by the guild. It could also include reminding guild members to shop at that business.

 

Mastercraftsman running their own business would of course, due to conflict of interest, be excluded from guild office or being on a guild jury.

 

This all would make it possible for the lowliest person starting out to someday own his own business and join the upper middle class.

 

Whether or not a company could move its operation to another location could be negotiated in a contract. This would help to protect American jobs.

 

This is my idea, let me know what you think of it.

 

 

My understanding of the Gospel comes from one very clear source. I was abused by a Senior Chief Thoodore (gift of God) Bronson when I was in the US Navy. In the process I started to reevaluate all of my values, starting by reading the Ten Commandments. I was looking for how what was happening to me could be justified. Trying to go back to the Ten Commandments as presented in Exodus and Deuteronomy had a major problem. I was already under stress and was not able to find in these chapters what the Ten Commandments were. If you read these two chapters, you will find that there are not Ten Command statements, but fourteen.

I remembered that my mother had told me that the Jewish community had a book of all wisdom. As a result, I decided to find that book and find the solution to my problem. It told me that the first Commandment was :

Moses summoned all Ithe Upright of God and said to them, "Hear, You Upright of God, the statutes and decrees which I proclaim in your hearing this day, that you may learn them and take care to observe them.

The Personal Name, our Mighty One, made a covenant with us at Mt. Sword; not with our fathers did he make this covenant, but with us, all of us who are alive here this day. The Personal Name spoke with you face to face on the mountain from the midst of the fire. Since you were afraid of the fire and would not go up the mountain, I stood between the Personal Name and you at that time, to announce to you these words of the Personal Name:

Remember, I am the Personal Name, am your Mighty One, who brought you out of the land of Oppression, that place of menial labor. You will have no mighty ones but me.

I first learned that we remember our rescue, but without the animosity and the hatred that comes from being abused. I also learned that the Jewish Community, like the Catholic community has within it the concept of the physical presence of the rescue. For the Jews it is the presence of the oppression and the rescue. In either case, we remember what it is like to be oppressed. When we see others hurting, it brings back those bad memories, and we then work to resolve the conflict. For us Catholics, the physical presence is the Eucharist. We read the narrative of our rescue and relive the event in present time. It is worth noting that in both traditions the reliving in present time is through the Passover, and it revolves around remembering our rescue in present time. All of the commandments revolve around this one issue, remembering the oppression and remembering the rescue.

Remember, You were once oppressed in the land of oppression, Europe, but you were delivered with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. ."