Tom Allen Realty

They came.

They gawked.

They played.

They prayed.

... and they bought next door.

Craig & Michelle Black: My new neighbors (maybe,... I think,... I hope).

Do you call yourself a Christian?

So I call myself a Christian. And the point is? To what purpose do I make the claim other than to suggest that I am better or more favored than others?

Imagine walking through life and informing others: "I am very beautiful (or handsome, if you prefer). I am extraordinarily wise and kind. I should also point out that I am quite humble. Just take it from me."

Something would be wrong with this. These qualities are to be lived out and demonstrated, and then noticed and called out by others. They are not to be "claimed."

And so it was among the first Christians, who did not call themselves Christians, but were called "Christians" by other observers. Acts 11:26. So imagine if it was considered very bad form if I were to announce to you that "I am a Christian" (a term that I very seldom use because so much damage has been done to it by genocidaires, bombers, murderers, rapists, hatemongers, and Koran burners, as well as the garden-variety hypocrites such as myself). If I were to declare to you that "I am a Christian," you might reasonably reply: "Really? I will take note of your claim, and I shall delight in observing your love, mercy, compassion, charity, commitment to social justice, etc."

Yes, I am quite mindful of the cautions and qualifiers to be noted here that cannot be well developed in this short blogpost intended to make a different (oft neglected) point. Indeed, Scripture directs us to profess our faith and proclaim Jesus, and we certainly do not earn and deserve salvation by "good works."

And/But Jesus stated that "All people will know you are my disciples by your love," [John 13:35, 1 John 4:20, and others], not by mere conclusionary proclamations. Scripture also states that "Faith without works is dead" [James 2:14-26] and that Christ followers bear visible fruit of the Spirit that resides within. Galatians 5.

How wonderful to imagine that it would be unnecessary to inform another that "I am a Christian," but rather that abundant evidence would cause others to identify and call me such. (This is far from a current reality, but rather a prayer and a goal toward which to strive.) 

Or to put it in radically opposite terms: If I were accused of being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict me?

Daddy won't ever forget his wedding anniversary: August 18, 2007. Mommy reminds him every time he comes home.

Dream a little dream...

Messy Christianity; messy, unboxable life

There is something especially precious about things learned from your own children, and I am grateful for so much learned from my sons. Among their many lessons has been that caution is required in embracing anybody and anything that purports to have it ALL figured out and neatly boxed up. Upon careful analysis, the “absurd” is ultimately discovered and mystery and more questions always bubble up. As a result, I have long had to honestly confess what I suppose is my “Christian existentialism.” You should neither recoil nor be impressed by the term. The most brilliant existentialists, Christian and otherwise, cannot seem to agree on a working, tidy definition of the term, and thus I dare not even try. But I can offer a passage from one of the most solid living Christian thinkers and writers, and ask if it resonates with you. I do not know if Eugene Peterson would place himself within light years of the term “Christian existentialism” (and it probably does not matter), but as Dale Dawson teaches the Bridge2Rwanda team, he certainly seems to encourage us to accept and celebrate “the edginess of uncertainty”:

“Far too many people choose to live in Egypt instead of by faith.  They go to religion the way I go to a baseball game—to escape the muddle, to have everything clear, to find a good seat from which they can see the whole scene at a glance, evaluate everyone’s performance easily and see people get what they deserve.  Moral box scores are carefully penciled in.  Statistics are obsessively kept.  Many religious meetings are designed to meet just such desires.  The world is reduced to what can be organized and regulated; every person is clearly labeled as being on your side or on the other side; there is never any doubt about what is good and what is bad.

The only problem with such “Egyptian” religion is that the clarity lasts only as long as the meeting.  It is not a deepening of reality but a vacation from it.  During that protected time and space, heroic performances are applauded and villains booed.  There is a clear-cut opposition to hate.  But back at work, at play, at home, the labels don’t stick.  Life outside the meeting is then resented as being hopelessly contaminated.  It is understandable that people who embrace this kind of religious life go to as many meetings as possible in order to have the experience of clear and controlled order as frequently as possible.

Neither shot nor married . . .

Flannery O’Connor once remarked that she had an aunt who thought that nothing happened in a story unless somebody got married or shot at the end of it.  But life seldom provides such definitive endings.  As a consequence, the best stories, the stories that show us our true condition by immersing us in reality, don’t provide them either.  Life is ambiguous.  There are loose ends.  It takes maturity to live with the ambiguity and the chaos, the absurdity and the untidiness.  If we refuse to live with it, we exclude something, and what we exclude may very well be the essential and the dear—the hazards of faith, the mysteries of God. [Emphasis mine.]

Jeremiah ends inconclusively.  We want to know the end, but there is no end.  The last scene of Jeremiah’s life shows him, as he had spent so much of his life, preaching God’s word to a contemptuous people (Jeremiah 44).  We want to know that he was finally successful.  Or we want to know that he was finally unsuccessful so that, since a life of faith and integrity doesn’t pay off, we can get on with finding another means by which to live.  We get neither in Jeremiah.  He doesn’t get married and he doesn’t get shot. In Egypt, the place he doesn’t want to be, with people who treat him badly, he continues determinedly faithful, magnificently courageous, heartlessly rejected—a towering life terrifically lived.

Run With The Horses

By Eugene Peterson

Could it be that this woman has peeled off a few more layers covering God's reality than have we?

I am grateful for Tommy, and Nathan, and Wesley,... and Eugene Peterson,... and Flannery O'Connor, and other honest folks who keep it real.

Green Protein!

John Lambert explains that those who bemoan the lack of protein at the base of the pyramid apparently have never tasted fresh grasshoppers.

They are actually most tasty at night with ample banana beer chasers.

Where is God to be readily found?

Yes, of course, God is to be found everywhere. As we taught our children,“There is no spot where God is not.” He is omnipresent. But that was not my question.

In a passage within one of her much longer devotional writings, Mother Teresa wrote:
Is not our mission
to give God to the poor?
Not a dead God, but a living, loving God.

I am inspired and moved by these words, fully recognizing that they present a deep mine to be explored for great hidden treasures. Among the obvious to be searched is "Who are the poor?" (I give considerable credence to the thoughts that “Loneliness is the greatest cause of the most desperate poverty"... and, of course, that "We are all spiritually poor, indeed, bankrupt apart from God.") I want to take great care to avoid any qualitative or value judgement concerning "the poor," recognizing that we are all impoverished.

Upon reading Mother Teresa's words, and without a trace of pushback, I could not resist stealing them (Stealing from Mother Teresa?!?) and adding to them to reflect my experience of the calling of God and him at work:

Is not our mission

to meet up with God living among the poor?

Not a dead God, but a living, loving God.

To be awestruck by his great presence among the poor,
And to humbly join him in his work,
To serve and bless the poor, and
To be blessed by him and by his beloved poor.

.....

I similarily journaled long ago before coming to Africa:

"Perhaps my greatest sin is the sin of indifference,... indifference to the deprivation and suffering of the poor in our sin-plagued world, even deluding myself with the repugnant belief that in my indifference I am aligned with Christ, who said “The poor will always be with you”. (What a perversion of Scripture!) We know from other very clear passages of Scripture that Christ was not indifferent to the poor, but rather cared so very much for them, and was filled with compassion for them,... and directed us to respond.

So why does God allow poverty? Does he? Or do we, the gluttonous rich? An all encompassing, definitive explanation is far beyong my grasp, but I do believe that poverty creates an opportunity to reveal what is in our hearts and souls: If something good (love, compassion, mercy, charity), and we respond as God has intended, then God is glorified (and we experience true joy). If something shameful (a miserly, selfish, hardened heart that neither fears nor trusts God), then we might ulitimately be convicted by the sight of the poor who surround us, and repent and be moved to action. In this marvelous dynamic, God is surely pleased by ministry to the poor and suffering, and also by the softening and transformation of hardened hearts which have been spurred to minster. A double blessing. A double measure of God’s grace to both the materially poor and the so-called rich."

Chillin' at home

Just chillin' at home with a couple of children from the neighborhood.

It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood

This is on the land upon which I am building a home,... and where beautiful and curious childen seem to mysteriously materialize from the elephant grass.

Peace Like a River, Leif Enger

I have never before read a book that I could not put down,… a story that I did not want to end,… with characters who I did not want to utter “goodbye.” Frankly, I do not know why I ever picked it up, but if you read it perhaps that question will be answered within its pages. It was a gift from my friend Tricia Crisafulli, a random gift received with gratitude but was surely destined to gather dust alongside my many other unread books. But in a rare leisure moment I picked up Peace Like a River by Leif Enger, could not set it back down, and I have been profoundly moved, confused and inspired. I dare not attempt to describe it except to tell you that it is NOT a Paul Simon tune nor a sugar coated Daily Devotional as the title might suggest; it is a tightly knit story with lovable, hateable, struggling characters. It is filled with fresh phrases, metaphors, and literary references more delicious than perfectly shapened, sun-ripened strawberries. But you have to believe in miracles to like this book. I loved it!

Radio Kills!

I know that “Radios don't kill people; People kill people"... but I also know that radio certainly can be lethal if mishandled, and that we must all be vigilant.

I used to be addicted to conservative “Talk Radio." I cannot estimate how many hours I listened to Rush Limbaugh and the others. I fed upon the “information" that they provided. Even after I became suspicious of the quality of the “information,” I continued to listen for the entertainment value. Then I became thoroughly bored, was no longer entertained, and I stopped listening.

I now live in Rwanda where “Hate Radio” played a critical role in organizing, igniting and directing the genocide of 1 million people in 100 days in 1994. Subsequently and quite justifiably, demagoguery and hate speech has been prohibited. I now look upon “Hate Radio” in the US and realize that hate is dangerously contagious. It has great appeal to the fear, selfishness, and darkness that lurks within each of us. If good people are unwittingly drawn and indulge, anyone can become dangerous. Let us not make the mistake of thinking that the distinctions between Rwanda and the US are so great that such a frenzied outbreak of violent hate could never be fomented in the US. It happened among educated Germans, so why could it not happen in US if we are not vigilant about the truth?

Rush Limbaugh recently made shocking statements about certain persons and events in East Africa (where I reside) that could not be further from the truth. Yes, the statements were mind bogglingly ignorant. But worse yet, they were provocative and dangerous,... and presumably millions of Americans believe them.

Joseph Kony is surely one of the most evil men on earth. Saddam Hussein was a gentleman compared to Joseph Kony, who regularly kidnaps and kills children, compels children to kill children, rapes and mutilates women, as he leads his “Lord's Resistance Army,” a band of psychopathic killers that Kony skillfully fashioned of the children that he kidnapped over the past 20 years. Joseph Kony is the scourge of Uganda, Eastern Congo, and Southern Sudan, where he delivers indiscriminate death and unspeakable savagery. He has long been hunted for his heinous crimes against humanity, but he has eluded capture. Not wanting to make the same regrettable mistake we made in Rwanda, President Obama recently decided to send 100 US military personnel to assist in the capture of this international criminal.

All of this is indisputable and very easy to confirm. Google away. Everybody knows it. But Rush Limbaugh announced to America that Joseph Kony and his Lords Resistance Army "are Christians" who are fighting Muslims, and that President Obama has sent US troops to invade Uganda and kill these Christians. In context, we should also acknowledge that many of Rush's listeners actually believe the nonsense that President Obama is a “closet Muslim" who is secretly working on behalf of Al Qaeda to destroy America from the inside.

Read the following transcript from Rush Limbaugh's own website:

Obama Invades Uganda, Targets Christians
October 14, 2011

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  President Obama has deployed troops to another war, in Africa, ladies and gentlemen.  Jacob Tapper, ABC News, is reporting that Obama has sent 100 US troops to Uganda to help combat Lord's Resistance Army.  Tapper reporting today:  "Two days ago President Obama authorized the deployment to Uganda of approximately 100 combat-equipped U.S. forces to help regional forces 'remove from the battlefield' -- meaning capture or kill -- Lord’s Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony and senior leaders of the LRA."  I wonder how the Wall Street crowd is gonna react when they find out that Obama has sent troops to another war?  "Mr. Limbaugh, it's just 100 peacekeepers."  Yep, yep, yep, that's how Libya started, and, by the way, there's no end in sight for Libya. 

"The forces will deploy beginning with a small group and grow over the next  month to 100. They will ultimately go to Uganda, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo." A hundred people are gonna go to all those places?  "The president made this announcement in a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, Friday afternoon, saying that 'deploying these U.S. Armed Forces furthers U.S. national security interests and foreign policy and will be a significant contribution toward counter-LRA efforts in central Africa.'"  LRA is Lord's Resistance Army.  And it doesn't mean God's resistance army.  Lord is some Lord, some guy.  A "Defense Department official tells ABC’s Luis Martinez at the Pentagon that the U.S. troops will be in Africa 'for a few months in an advisory role.'" One hundred troops in an advisory role. 

So nothing to worry about here, folks, only gonna be for a few months.  Now, up until today, most Americans have never heard of the combat Lord's Resistance Army.  And here we are at war with them.  Have you ever heard of Lord's Resistance Army, Dawn?  How about you, Brian?  Snerdley, have you?  You never heard of Lord's Resistance Army?  Well, proves my contention, most Americans have never heard of it, and here we are at war with them. Lord's Resistance Army are Christians. It means God.  I was only kidding.  Lord's Resistance Army are Christians.  They are fighting the Muslims in Sudan.  And Obama has sent troops, United States troops to remove them from the battlefield, which means kill them.  That's what the lingo means, "to help regional forces remove from the battlefield," meaning capture or kill. 

So that's a new war, a hundred troops to wipe out Christians in Sudan, Uganda, and -- (interruption) no, I'm not kidding.  Jacob Tapper just reported it.  Now, are we gonna help the Egyptians wipe out the Christians?  Wouldn't you say that we are?  I mean the Coptic Christians are being wiped out, but it wasn't just Obama that supported that.  The conservative intelligentsia thought it was an outbreak of democracy.  Now they've done a 180 on that, but they forgot that they supported it in the first place.  Now they're criticizing it. 

Lord's Resistance Army objectives.  I have them here.  "To remove dictatorship and stop the oppression of our people." Now, again Lord's Resistance Army is who Obama sent troops to help nations wipe out.  The objectives of the Lord's Resistance Army, what they're trying to accomplish with their military action in these countries is the following:  "To remove dictatorship and stop the oppression of our people; to fight for the immediate restoration of the competitive multiparty democracy in Uganda; to see an end to gross violation of human rights and dignity of Ugandans; to ensure the restoration of peace and security in Uganda, to ensure unity, sovereignty, and economic prosperity beneficial to all Ugandans, and to bring to an end the repressive policy of deliberate marginalization of groups of people who may not agree with the LRA ideology."  Those are the objectives of the group that we are fighting, or who are being fought and we are joining in the effort to remove them from the battlefield. 

The government of Uganda claims that Lord's Resistance Army only has 500 or a thousand soldiers in total.  So what's the threat?  If that's the maximum size of their army, what's the threat?  A thousand soldiers?  Now, 1100 soldiers because we have sent a hundred. I'm not making this up.  This is Jacob Tapper.  ABC News had reported that Obama got a letter off to John Boehner a couple days ago announcing this.  It's just for a few months until the Lord's Resistance Army is eradicated.  That's all.  Just a few months.  Not much of a threat. 

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Here's Mike in Youngsville, North Carolina.  Welcome to the EIB Network.  Hello.

CALLER:  Rush, this is Mike.  How you doing?

RUSH:  Very well, sir.  Thank you.

CALLER:  Let me just say thank you so much for your dedication and teaching the principles and the truths of current events today, and I'm a longtime listener, first-time caller.

RUSH:  Thank you, sir, very much.  I sincerely appreciate it.

CALLER:  Yeah, I told Snerdley I want to get to my point quickly --

RUSH:  Yeah.

CALLER:  -- but just the difference between the Tea Party and the occupation (sic) Wall Street crowd, and that is that, you know, I'm gonna be 60 years old this year in just a few weeks.

RUSH:  You don't sound that old.

CALLER:  Yeah, I'm gonna be 60 and I've got four children, 32, 30, 29, and 27.  I just thank God for this country. I thank God for all the military people that are listening right now serving our country presently and in the past.  My parents, both my mum and dad served in World War II.  They met on a blind date, my dad passed away in 2003, they would have been married 65 years this year.

RUSH:  Whoa.  That's something I can't even imagine.

CALLER:  Yeah.  And, Rush, you know what?  I went to a Tea Party rally in Raleigh last year, and the clientele of people that were there were older, you know, I was 59 at the time, and there were a lot of people my age, there were a lot of people right up until that World War II generation that had served. They were polite; they were kind; they were orderly; they were clean. I mean, we left the capitol and you coulda eaten off the ground.

RUSH:  Yeah, I know.

CALLER:  Yeah.  And, you know, Rush, I grew up, I was privileged and my parents sent me to a parochial school.  And, you know, this ADD that they talk about, you know, people say ADD, ADD, everybody ADHD, whatever.

RUSH:  Yeah.

CALLER:  You know what I call that?  ADD?

RUSH:  Being a kid.

CALLER:  Yeah.  Absence of discipline disorder.

RUSH:  Well.

CALLER:  That's what it is.

RUSH:  I like it.

CALLER:  I had it when I was young.  But the nuns beat it out of me in about two weeks, along with all the other kids that were unruly in the class.  And we were taught to be obedient.  We were taught to respect our elders.  Rush, I went to high school when you did.  I had to wear a suit coat and tie at a public school and have my hair cropped so it didn't go over the collar and didn't go over the ears, and these kids today, I've seen it for 30 years since I started having children of my own, and my wife and I would take our kids out to public restaurants and public places, and we made our children obey, we made them, they knew --

RUSH:  Well, you know, that's the old days.  Now parents want to be friends.

CALLER:  Yeah, they want to be their friends.

RUSH:  Yeah.

CALLER:  They want to be their friends and this is the result of it.  We have these kids that think they're entitled to everything, you know, and we've seen it for 30 years.  To this day, you go into any shopping center or store or restaurant and these young children are so unruly, they're crying, they're screaming, and it just reminds me, I knew there was gonna be a payback, and this is it, this is the payback --

RUSH:  You knew there was -- (laughing)

CALLER:  This is it.  We're seeing it.

RUSH:  Well, there is a lot of spoiled bratness --

CALLER:  Yes, exactly.

RUSH:  -- no question.  How do you feel about the news?  I want to go back, your extensive military background, how do you react to the news that Obama has dispatched a hundred soldiers to fight radical Christians in Africa?

CALLER:  That's amazing.  I can't believe he's doing that. 

RUSH:  You can't?

CALLER:  You know, Rush, our parents, my mum and dad both served in World War II.  I forget how many million soldiers that we sent overseas, and we lost 450,000 lives in 44 months, you know.  And they came back, they didn't complain, they went, they served their country, we kept our freedom, we freed all those people that were in those camps of many nationalities --

RUSH:  There's no question that times are different, and child rearing has changed.  Not everywhere, though.  Anyway, Mike, I'm grateful you're in the audience.  I'm glad you called.  Thanks very much.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: On sending the soldiers to fight the Christians in Africa, here is how Obama ends his letter to John Boehner justifying sending troops to Uganda: "I have directed this deployment, which is in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct US foreign relations and as commander-in-chief and chief executive." Would somebody explain to me what you think our "national security interests" are in Uganda. Now, keep in mind, folks, this is the same Barack Obama who said that we had no national security interests in attacking Iraq. After they were shooting at our planes and trying to kill our president and Allah knows what else, Obama said, "We got no national security interests in Iraq! They don't threaten us! What are we doing?" We've got 500 to a thousand soldiers in the Lord's Resistance Army and Uganda trying to wipe them out, and we're sending a hundred soldiers to help them.

Vital national interests are at stake, according to Obama.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I wonder when the Nobel Committee is gonna call Obama and ask for the Peace Prize back. You think this is what they had in mind when he got the Peace Prize? Remember, he got that prize on the come. He hadn't done anything for peace, and since then, how many wars are we in now, five? And he hasn't gotten us out of any of these wars? I know, isn't gonna happen.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

Is that right? The Lord's Resistance Army is being accused of really bad stuff? Child kidnapping, torture, murder, that kind of stuff? Well, we just found out about this today. We're gonna do, of course, our due diligence research on it. But nevertheless we got a hundred troops being sent over there to fight these guys -- and they claim to be Christians.
END TRANSCRIPT

Hands Off Cain (Genesis 4:15)

A good humbling can do a heart good, and today was a very good day for my heart.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Louise Mushikiwabo, invited me to attend the Conference on the Abolition Or Moratorium on Execution of the Death Penalty. It was opened with a speech by President Paul Kagame, and was attended by 200 representatives of African nations, including many high-ranking leaders, who came together to call upon all people of the world to abolish the death penalty, as had most of these represented nations, including Rwanda.

These African leaders spoke with calm voices of impeccable reason, supported by research and data. As I sat and listened, I was indeed humbled yet again by the reminder that it is much more probable that I was sent to Africa to learn, not to teach,… that as much as I want to believe and be inspired by Rick Warren’s opening first line “It’s not about you!” it may, in fact, be “All about me” and the learning and growing that remains quite unfinished. There I was an American, from the most developed nation that seemingly has and knows everything, sitting in the heart of Central Africa, being taught and enlightened by African voices of profound reason and grace.

I encourage us to pause and reflect upon some of my conference notes and random thoughts of my own:

The death penalty was not normally part of traditional African systems of justice, but was generally introduced by colonial powers.

There is presently no capital punishment in 37 African countries, 17 of which have abolished the death penalty, and 20 more of which have moratoriums that constitute “de facto abolition.”

Every European country has abolished the death penalty, as have our neighbors Canada, Mexico, and most of Latin America.

The United States continues to execute its citizens in considerable numbers. Last year we ranked number five in the world, behind China, Iran, North Korea, and Yemen, but ahead of Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe.

I was very privileged to sit with Yvonne Mokgoro, the Justice of the Constitutional Court of South Africa who delivered the ruling that abolished the death penalty in South Africa. I also sat with Michele Duvivier Pierre-Louis, the former Prime Minister of Haiti, which abolished the death penalty immediately upon the fall of “Baby Doc’s” oppressive dictatorship. Both women demonstrated spellbinding wisdom and grace.

I was reminded that in a different context (the Libyan issue) President Kagame broke ranks and declared that “Any government that kills its own people loses its legitimacy,” and it seemed to me that statement is worthy of consideration in the death penalty debate. Once you start allowing for exceptions (in the U.S. we call them “special circumstances”) where do you draw the line, and WHO will draw the line? We can be certain that the lines will not be drawn by the disenfranchised, but rather the privileged. And the most frightening “special circumstance” is the allegation of treason. The threat of the oppressive abuse of the death penalty far outweighs any value it could possibly have.

The greatest wisdom Ronald Reagan taught us was that government is to be distrusted and feared. Government is never so fearsome as when it is holding the implements of death that we have authorized it to use,… “but please, not against me or my loved ones.” So why would I authorize fallible, politically-driven government to decide matters of life and death of  one of my fellow citizens?

 The research clearly establishes that the death penalty is not a deterrent, one of those inconvenient facts that many choose to ignore or deny, but without any basis.

In every nation, the judicial process is fallible. Judges are fallible. Lawyers are fallible. Juries are fallible. We hope that “justice will be done,” and when we miss the mark, we then expect the error to ultimately be remedied. But execution of the death penalty is irreversible. Our inevitable mistakes cannot be corrected.

Imposition of the death penalty is notoriously inequitable, with the weight of it falling quite disproportionately upon minorities and the poor (with ineffective lawyers).

The death penalty imposes enormous pain upon those who are innocent, e.g., the terrified, heartbroken, grieving mother and father and siblings of the condemned.

In America, the death penalty also constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment” of the survivors of the victim who may suffer 20 years of  anxious suspense before the legal process concludes and they can finally focus on getting their lives back on track.

Yes, one might understandably exclaim: “But the condemned DESERVES it!” Perhaps he does. But our society does not deserve it,… the refutation of our values and the denigration of human life.

How/what do we teach by our position on the death penalty? What teaching opportunities do we forsake?

Consider the irony of indulging our “bloodlust” and thereby relieving the condemned of his sustained punishment. Who wins and who loses as a result of this exercise? Would we not have the perpetrator reflect upon his heinous act as long as possible?

Imposition of the death penalty certainly does not demonstrate anything at all to the departed defendant (who is no longer giving it any thought), nor to the homicide victim who was not present at the trial or the execution. The only thing it demonstrates to the survivors of the victim and the rest of us is a devaluation, not an affirmation, of human life.

A recent study in California revealed that maintaining the death penalty costs taxpayers $184 million a year more than if the state's condemned killers were kept in prison for life.

Many of us seem to believe that upright, “good citizenship” compels us to support the death penalty. That puts us on the team of good guys, against the bad guys. But it is never good citizenship to ignore inconvenient truth and facts. It is never good citizenship to squander public resources. It is never good citizenship to join the ranks of the oppressors, rather than those who would use sound reason to examine and address civic challenges and social ills. It is never good citizenship to desire death over compassion.

The United States suffers a tremendous loss of political goodwill with each execution, none of which go unnoticed. (Africans at this conference know much more about recent executions in U.S. than do Americans.) Yes, the world watches in disbelief and horror. “The land of the free” is viewed as a land of barbarians. Today in the United States, we still allow for executions by hanging, firing squad, and frying in the electric chair. With each execution America undermines its legitimacy and its voice. We cannot preach the merits of democracy to less democratic nations and continue such highly visible atrocious behavior. Rwanda provides a very good illustration: American interests, including our State Department, attempt to apply pressure upon the Government of Rwanda to advance our version of First Amendment Rights. But our voice lacks credibility when our behavior associates us with Iran, North Korea, Syria, Libya, Zimbabwe, etc.

 The death penalty in the United States actually prevents us from bringing perpetrators to justice, as many countries will not extradite suspects to the U.S. to stand trial if they might face the death penalty.

We must imagine the harm we cause to our fellow citizens (prison workers) who are directed to actually carry out the death penalty. No healthy person can kill another person, then go home, crack open a beer, and figure that “It’s all in a days work.”  Some of the humanity of the executioner necessarily dies along with the one executed, no less than the desensitized child soldier or the gang member who is required to kill as part of their orientation into the organization.

The representative of one African nation explained that his country still has the death penalty, but their executioner died two years ago. They have advertised the “Job Available,” but no one is willing to accept the position, thus reminding me of the 1960’s bumper sticker: “What If They Gave a War, And Nobody Came?”

Please note that I do not lean heavily on the various arguments of “ fundamental human rights” and a “violation human rights.” I am comfortable with the notion that the serial killer has forfeited and lost his rights. My plea is not so much for him, as it is for us. What will his acts evoke from us? Will his killing, turn us into killers? The crisis presents an opportunity for us to demonstrate repugnant revenge or calm, reasoned, noble values that we would like to demonstrate to our children.

And do not misunderstand: Abolitionists do not advocate impunity, “free passes,” no justice for the victims. They merely advocate alternative forms of  punishment which might include life imprisonment without possibility of parole, restitution to the victims and the community, and other forms of punishment that may constitute a very “heavy sentence.”

If Rwanda could find its way to the abolition of the death penalty following the 1994 genocide of 1 million people, then surely any country can. If any country “needed” the death penalty to bring necessary civil order, it was Rwanda. But instead Rwanda abolished the death penalty. With no death penalty to deter serious crime, why are the streets of Rwanda (all the streets, everywhere, day or night) so much safer than the streets in America?

Public opinion is not trustworthy on this issue of the death penalty, just as it was not trustworthy as Pilate and Jesus stood before the angry mob. This is an issue for courageous, informed leadership, not for demagogues or wimpy politicians. We might respect a political leader who recognizes the need to teach and lead. But we should have contempt for present-day Pilates and the politicians who stir a cheering crowd with “I am proud to tell you that I am a strong supporter of the death penalty.”

A Muslim from Morocco explained that sharia (Islamic canonical law) has a tradition whereby the individual victim might choose between death for the perpetrator, compensation, or forgiveness,… and the greatest of these is forgiveness. (Islamic nations are split on capital punishment, just as our Christian nations.)

I paused and reflected when a delegate urged that this matter be reasoned through and decided without religious language or references. Interesting. Sensible,… but not possible. My Muslim colleague and I agree that no person of faith can be asked to consider matters of life and death without referencing the spiritual reality in which we live. We cannot check at the door everything that we know to be true, and then enter the room with anything to contribute to the conversation. HOWEVER, my Muslim colleague and I both believe that our respective faiths and understanding of the revealed truth of God lead us (and can lead others) to a position against capital punishment.

Although my list, below, was hastily compiled and is quite incomplete, Christians might carefully consider the following as we seek to discover the mind and heart of God:

With the execution of that death penalty, we terminate any possibility of confession, repentance, redemption and reconciliation. An execution is a repudiation of our desire and our hope in God’s power to redeem the lost.

“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,”… and  there are no exceptions or “special circumstances.”

As for the previously stated sentiment: “But this murderer DESERVES it!” Yes, he does,… and so do I,… and so do you, in the eyes of the Holy and Righteous Judge. I think it was CS Lewis who observed that “There is no man on Death Row who has committed an act as heinous as I am capable of.” That is the condition of my dark, corrupt heart. And do we remember somebody once saying something about “Anyone who looks upon a woman with lust in his heart has already committed adultery”? His initials are J.C., and I don’t mean Jimmy Carter, although President Carter was indeed self-condemned on this matter. (Matthew 5:28)

But the Lord said  “All right then, if anyone kills Cain, Cain will be avenged seven times as much.” Then the Lord put a special mark on Cain so that no one who found him would strike him down. So Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.  Genesis 4:15

Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord.

 On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;

if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.

In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”

Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. Romans 12:19

“All right, but let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone!” John 8:7

For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins. Matthew 6:14

You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. Matthew 5:38

Human life is a miraculous creation of God. It is sacred, “fearfully and wonderfully made.” Christians must demonstrate harmony and consistency in our position on the sanctity human life. One of my sons did considerable research on the death penalty, and in doing so he was moved to reconsider his position on abortion. It appears quite foolish, or at least inconsistent, for one to crusade against abortion and be in support of the death penalty,… or crusade against the death penalty can be in favor of abortion.

When we chant “Death! Death!” we are crying out for “Justice!” In truth, however, what I most want, what I most desperately need, is mercy and grace. If justice were to rain down upon us in its purest, infallible form, that would not be good news for me. And the Bible tells me that I have a choice to receive one or the other, judgement or grace, according to what I demonstrate:

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged.  For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Matthew 7:1

*************************

So these African voices (and the voice of Jesus) overwhelmed me today with both reason and with grace. It was powerful, and then I had an appointment with real-life that was even more powerful:

At the conclusion of today’s session one of the speakers encouraged me to introduce myself and meet a rather motley looking crew, mostly from America, in T-shirts branded “Journey of Hope.” I did as suggested.

I met Edward Mpagi, a Ugandan who spent 18 ½ years on Death Row,… until it was discovered that his “murder victim” was very much alive. Unfortunately, his cousin who was also condemned to die for the same murder that never happened did not survive Death Row. Death Row was not kind to Edward, who now requires assistance to walk. Imagine: I was not just reading words such as you are now. We were face-to-face. What do you say to a brother who wasted away on Death Row for a crime that he did not commit, and whose cousin died on Death Row for the same crime that never happened? “Uh,… Sorry.” That was pretty much it, for I was dumbfounded. He was very tender-hearted and soft-spoken, and recognizing my sorrow, he seemed to graciously communicate “Hey, forget about it.” But I don’t think he really wants us to forget about it, for he traveled to this conference so that others might understand.

Edward was assisted by Bill Babbitt of California, who himself uses a cane to walk. (They were quite a beautiful sight of loving brothers caring for one another.) Bill was never a death row inmate, but wishes that he could trade places with his brother, Manny (Manuel Babbitt), who was:

Manny, an African-American, was a U.S. Marine, who fought five major battles in Vietnam, including the siege of Khe Sanh. He took shrapnel through his skull and was believed to be dead. His lifeless body was piled into a helicopter with other corpses. He ultimately received a citation from President Johnson and was decorated with numerous medals.

But Manny brought demons home with him from the battlefield. He suffered serious PTSD and schizophrenia, and spent time in psychiatric hospitals in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. He attempted suicide three times.

In 1980, while under the influence of alcohol and PCP, Manny perpetrated a home invasion and killed elderly Leah Schendel. His brother, Bill (who told me the story) turned Manny into the police after being assured that Manny would be sent back to an appropriate psychiatric hospital. But instead Manny was tried for murder and sentenced to death. Bill assured their mother that “Manny will not be executed. It is not possible. They promised me.”

While sitting on death row, Manny was awarded the Purple Heart for his sacrificial and courageous service to the United States and his Band of Brothers,…  and then he was executed. He refused his last meal so that the $50 allotted would be given to homeless Vietnam veterans. Bill, who turned in his brother in exchange for “ false promises” and was present at the execution, sighed as he explained to me that “My brother’s blood is on my hands.”

Then I turned to the Randy Gardner, whose brother Ronnie Lee Gardner was executed last year in Utah, by FIRING SQUAD! (My subsequent Google research reveals that Ronnie chose death by firing squad, but why would we allow the condemned to make barbarians of us before a watching world?) Although the daughter of the condemned had spent many, many years preparing for the day, and she believed that she was indeed prepared, it proved to be too much to bear and she attempted suicide.

And then the coup de grace:

Soft-spoken Bill Pelke told me the story of his grandmother, Ruth Pelke, and how her story ultimately became HIS story.

Ruth was a Christ follower, who loved to give Bible lessons to anyone who desired to learn about Jesus. One day four girls, aged 14 to 16, skipped school, drank alcohol and smoked pot, and knocked on Ruth’s door, ostensibly for a Bible lesson, which turned into a robbery and Ruth’s Homecoming. It was pretty brutal. Ruth was stabbed 33 times, and 15-year-old Paula Cooper was sentenced to die in the electric chair. (In telling the story, caucasian Bill Pelke will never mention that the four girls were African-American, but African-American Bill Babbitt added that detail when Bill Pelke was not present, for he wanted me to fully understand depth of Pelke’s current kindness, fairness, and grace.)

Bill Pelke supported the death penalty. It was simply “justice” for the brutal death of his beloved grandmother. He intended to be present at Paula’s execution. “But then I experienced a spiritual transformation. I recognized that my grandmother died because she wanted to share the love of Jesus. I did not have what my grandmother had, but I wanted it, and I called out to God to give me what she had,… the love, the compassion, the ability and strength to forgive, the healing, and God indeed transformed me. I stopped focusing on how my grandmother died, and instead I focused on how she lived. And so I campaigned to have Paula’s sentence commuted. During this time, Paula earned her GED and a college degree. We were ultimately successful, and after 28 years in prison, Paula will be released from prison on July 13, 2013. I will be standing outside the prison gate to receive her with open arms. Revenge is never, NEVER the answer. The killing of another human being could never have healed me.

This conversation took place in a crowded 5 star hotel, the only 5 star hotel in Rwanda. Toward the end, Bill’s voice cracked slightly with the emotion of a tender, broken heart, mended by grace. When it did, I experienced a very unfortunate combination of a tough guy trying to carefully guard and control his emotions, coupled with an unexpected surge of emotion, coupled with swallowing wrong while gasping at the same time,… the perfect storm: I choked and my trachea totally seized and clamped down. I could NOT breathe in AT ALL. I stood up. I crouched down. I made animal noises that I cannot even attempt to describe. I became the center of attention, a shocking spectacle that brought the entire hotel congregation to a standstill. I wondered if I would actually die, or if my trachea would relax once I passed out.

So, I will end as I began: A good humbling can do a heart good, and today was a very good day for my heart. I was indeed humbled and my heart was thereby greatly enriched. I too desire to be like Ruth Pelke. Although I became quite an embarrassing spectacle, God’s love, wisdom, forgiveness, and redemptive grace was a much greater spectacle.

A Double Standard

I delighted in purchasing Persian carpets to furnish our California home. They are beautiful, functional, and in some curious (specious) way seem to demonstrate that “all is well.” A Persian carpet was to me what a cow is to a Rwandan. I stayed pretty close to the local Persian carpet dealers, knew them by name, and was quite amused by the fact that most of them had been conducting a “Going Out of Business Closeout Sale” for more than 10 years. Their “Going Out Of Business” sign was so faded that a passerby might misunderstand and think that the store had GONE out of business. In fact, business was thriving, and I am quite confident that it still is.

Today on a run (okay, more like a very brisk walk) I was again amused by this phenomenon as my eyes fell upon this permanent sign in Kigali:

Andrea Redmond and Tricia Crisafulli are accomplished authors who are in Kigali writing a new book on Rwanda and its leadership. The working title of the book is “Rwanda Inc." …  look for it in fine bookstores everywhere commencing October 2012. Andrea and Tricia are extraordinarily bright, insightful, and articulate,… and have become my new “Life Coaches.” As they “go deep” into Rwanda and the people that lead its phenomenal rise from ashes, they uncover much. They talk to everyone, putting forth broad, open questions, and then they listen very attentively. Nobody and no place is without flaws and struggles, and of course sometimes we hear of the challenges, problems, struggles, and flaws unique to Rwanda. Later, in private discussion, Andrea and Tricia point out that the issue discussed is NOT unique to Rwanda, but is rather quite universal. On point is a very interesting piece by Tim Gallimore which I read today in the newspaper:

Tim Gallimore

5 October 2011

As a U.S. State Department consultant, I was among the first Americans who went to Rwanda in 1997 to assist the country in rebuilding the journalistic corps and establishing a private media system. During that visit I had a chance to discuss with Ambassador Charles Staples what expectations the Untied States had for the development of democracy and conducting elections in Rwanda. He assured me that the State Department would view Rwanda as a special case because of the devastation that the genocide caused in the society. He said that the U.S. would not push Rwanda to conduct elections and do all the other things that we in the West consider to be measures of Democracy.

It is unfortunate that the promise of Ambassador Staples and the goodwill of others, including human rights organizations, have not prevailed with respect to Rwanda's recovery and political development.

Over the years, I have noticed that there is a double standard when it comes to assessments of democracy in Rwanda, justice in Rwanda, freedom of expression in Rwanda and human rights in Rwanda. No other country, not even the United States, is being held to the standards and expectations that are being imposed on Rwanda in many crucial domains.

The fact that we are having this panel discussion, titled and advertised as it was, and laced with the poisonous rhetorical questions that were posed to guide the discussion, is evidence that there is a double standard being applied when it comes to Rwanda and to President Kagame.  [WOW! This guy is Nathan confronting King David!]

It is hard to imagine that a similar panel would be assembled to examine the "myth" of President Obama, the Prime Minister of Israel, or any other world leader, or to explore in serious public debate the unsubstantiated charges and allegations of serious crime that have been made against Paul Kagame.

We are not here to debate the wisdom or appropriateness of the U.S. trying to make the world over in its own image. But it is necessary to examine the double standard that is being applied to Rwanda, especially in the area of freedom of expression and particularly when it comes to laws against denying the genocide of the Tutsi that took place in 1994.

Yes, freedom of expression is an important component of a free society and for ensuring the human rights of individuals. But freedom of expression is not absolute. It has its limitations. It always has and it always will in every society.

The history of freedom of expression in the United States contains many chapters about the suppression of dissidents, Aliens legal and otherwise, Communists and Socialists of every stripe, of unpopular religious groups such as the Jehovah Witnesses, and the silencing of other critical voices and vulnerable minorities who questioned the orthodoxy of their day and expressed political views that the majority found intolerable and offensive. These groups and their ideas were characterized as "Threats foreign and domestic" and the government found it necessary to guard against.

The U.S. government has exercised prior restraint (silencing expression) to preserve national security, the lives of war troops, public peace, public decency and morals, as well as fair trials for the accused as important societal values when weighed against the individual's right to free expression and freedom of the press. It is dishonest to pretend that these practices were not a part of the American experiment in freedom and democracy.

It is also hypocritical for human rights organizations in the U.S. and elsewhere to act as if these practices do not still exist in the democratic countries that they point to as paragons of virtue when it comes to freedom of expression and respect for human rights.

American journalists are still obligated to obey court injunctions and gag rules that put a prior restraint on their right to broadcast and publish what they please. Libel and invasion of privacy are recognized civil offenses for which journalists and private parties are still accountable under U.S. law.

It is at their peril that Americans exercise freedom of expression in 2011 if they choose to threaten the life or limb of the U.S. president or anyone in the line of succession to the presidency.

Threatening the President of the United States is a class D felony under United States Code Title 18, Section 871. In fact, the prototype for Section 871 was the British Treason Act of 1351.

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully deposits for conveyance in the mail or for a delivery from any post office or by any letter carrier any letter, paper, writing, print, missive, or document containing any threat to take the life of, to kidnap, or to inflict bodily harm upon the President of the United States, the President-elect, the Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President of the United States, or the Vice President-elect, or knowingly and willfully otherwise makes any such threat against the President, President-elect, Vice President or other officer next in the order of succession to the office of President, or Vice President-elect, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Perhaps the most well-known and long-prevailing restriction on freedom of expression in the United States is that of "Falsely shouting Fire in a crowded theater and causing a panic." Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. wrote the infamous line in a unanimous Supreme Court decision upholding the conviction of Socialist Party Secretary Charles Schenck because he advocated opposition to the draft during World War I. The Court found that The First Amendment did not protect Schenk's speech encouraging insubordination during times of war because such political advocacy was a "clear and present danger" to the nation.

The clear and present danger test for punishing harmful speech has evolved over time but what has remained constant are the limitations on communicating falsehood and causing public harm. Even today, freedom of expression is prohibited if it will result in "Imminent lawless action." America still finds it necessary to punish speech in order to guard against evils.

Rwanda must also be vigilant against the clear and ever-present danger of genocide as manifested in the ideology and actions of those who have vowed to finish the job they started in 1994. They have expressed it in church houses and schoolrooms across the country. They have expressed it to UN Tribunal staff and publicly on a Rwandan radio station. The history of such expression in Rwanda testifies definitively that there is no greater threat to the nation than the imminent lawless action promised by these would-be perpetrators.

So in response to this documented danger, the government of Rwanda conducted studies, held parliamentary debates and promulgated laws prohibiting genocide ideology; denying, negating, minimizing, justifying or approving of genocide; and prohibiting discrimination and sectarianism. Instead of applauding these measures as prudent actions of a responsible government, Rwanda has been severely criticized and accused of suppressing political dissent, media censorship, and denying human rights.

The double standard is even more obvious when you consider that laws against Holocaust and genocide denial exist in more than 15 countries--including Rwanda. No other country with similar laws is criticized as Rwanda is.

Rwandans are free to say what they want to say. There is no prior restraint exercised by the government. However, genocide deniers, minimizers, trivializers and sympathizers must face the consequences of their expressions and pay the price for their illegal actions.

It took more than 150 years for freedom of expression to mature to the level where it is now in the Untied Stated. Rwanda is being asked to reach the same level of tolerance just 17 years after the devastating genocide. That ladies and gentlemen is an unfair and vicious double standard.

The United States has the highest documented incarceration rate in the world. At the end of 2009 there were 743 adults incarcerated per 100,000 people. According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) 2,292,133 adults were incarcerated in U.S. federal and state prisons, and in county jails in 2009 -- about 1% of the adult population in the U.S.

The United States has 4% of the world's population and 25% of the world's incarcerated population.[9]

In 2009, the American penal system held about 2.3 million adults. China was second, with 1.5 million people behind bars.

Another 4.9 million adults were either on probation or parole. In total, 7.2 million adults were under correctional supervision (probation, parole, jail, or prison) in 2009 -- about 3.1% of the U.S. resident adult population."[1][2][9]

The United States is 5th among the nations with the death penalty that still executes prisoners. In 2010, the U.S. executed 46 people.

America's record on the use of torture and extraordinary rendition of suspects to countries like Libya is well known.

The systemic discrimination against ethnic minorities is a continuing and pervasive practice in American society as is racial profiling by law enforcement agencies. In fact, the courts stepped in last week in an attempt to halt the execution of an African-American man in Texas because of racial bias in the judicial system and racist comments that were made by an expert witness during the trial proceedings.

Two wrongs never justify any wrongdoer, but the U.S. and members of this panel are hardly in a position to be lecturing anyone about human rights, never mind lecturing Rwanda which has made remarkable progress in dispensing justice and reestablishing the rule of law after the genocide against the Tutsi minority in 1994.

I also question the motives and agenda of detractors, critics and defectors who represented the Government of Rwanda and worked side-by-side with President Paul Kagame for years before denouncing the very same government and president for crimes that, if we believe their accusations, they themselves would have been complicit in committing against the Rwandan people.

The reasonable person of ordinary common sense would require explanation of how it is that these critics and defectors have just suddenly come to see so clearly the wrongdoing of their colleagues and compatriots after being blind to these infractions for such a long time. Why is it that they have waited until they are no longer enjoying the benefits of their position with the Rwandan government to denounce and decry it as criminal and repressive?

Tim Gallimore is an international communication consultant and mass media trainer. From 2004 to 2008 he acted as spokesperson for the prosecutor of the ICTR. Tim has a Ph.D. in mass communications from Indiana University- Bloomington.

The above is a speech the author presented at and Open Society Institute conference on September 19 entitled, "Revising Paul Kagame: Myth and Reality After the Genocide in Rwanda."