Friday, January 29, 2010

Mor Gregorios Community Center Continues to Provide Free Help and Free Lunch

Free Help with Unemployment and Free Lunch

The Mor Gregorios Community Center continues to provide help for individuals
with their unemployment claims. Using the center¹s computers, individuals
can file their unemployment claims and weekly unemployment reports, as well
as receive other worked related help.

Since the first of this year, the center has seen an increase in the number
of people seeking help. Last week, the Indiana Department of Workforce
Development announced that Indiana¹s unemployment rate had increased to 9.9
percent. This has also meant increased numbers at the Mor Gregorios
Community Center.

The Mor Gregorios Community Center provides free help to individuals in
Marshall, Starke, Fulton, and other surrounding counties. Volunteers trained
by the Indiana Department of Workforce Development on how to file
unemployment claims and weekly reports provide the assistance. The DWD also
provided the center with computers for the program. Other computers were
provided by Ancilla College. The center is one of the several community and
faith based organizations, which have partnered with Workforce Development.

On Sunday, lunch is provided to all using the services. And every day there
is coffee and support and help. Lunch is served on other days as well.

According to the Center¹s director, Father Theodosius Walker, ³Work is an
expression of our dignity and our involvement in God¹s creation. In this
time of economic crisis, as more and more people are losing their jobs, it
is harder for them to express this dignity. It is also harder for them to
pay their bills, provide shelter for their families, and generally make ends
meet.²

To file unemployment claims in Indiana, claimants must file online. Many
people lack the computer skills and computers to do so. Some find access at
friend¹s homes and libraries. But, more are turning to the Mor Gregorios
Community Center¹s employment program. For those who lack any computer
skills, volunteers help individuals actually filing their claims. The center
also helps individuals prepare resumes and file for jibs online.
Interviewing skills are also taught and practiced. There is also an
employment support group. The groups and the volunteers also help in any
way needed to provide practical job skills, career information, education,
technology, and support and mentoring to participants. The program supports
the pursuit of work and fair wages.

In addition to the employment program, the Mor Gregorios Community also
provides several other public programs. Some of these programs include the
following:

* Recovery Program: 12-Step classes and small groups for those with
additions, hurts, hang-ups, and other problems. Individual and pastoral and
spiritual guidance and direction are also available.
* Re-Entry Program: Working with recently released inmates from jail and
prison, helping them become productive citizens.
* Information and Referral: Case management. Provides information and
referral for emergency assistance to other agencies and programs.
* Community Development: Help with community outreach, mentoring, and
community development.

Father Theodosius said that, ³The early Christians, because of their faith
and experience of God¹s love, were able to perceive one another as brethren.
In their view, those on the margins of society (the poor, the widows, the
orphans, and the strangers) were the scale by which the justice of the whole
society was weighted. We can make a difference in the lives of your friends
and neighbors, and are called to do so by God.²

All Mor Gregorios Community Center¹s programs are open to all people.
Participants do not need to be Christians. The programs are open for those
of faith and of no faith. Everyone qualifies for the programs offered. All
programs seek to be supportive, respectful, and are always confidential.

The hours of the Mor Gregorios Community Center are as follows:
* Sunday ­ 12:00 noon until 4:00 pm with free lunch served
* Monday ­ 10:00 am until 4:00 pm
* Tuesday ­ 10:00 am until 4:00 pm
* Wednesday ­ 10:00 am until 4:00 pm
* Thursday ­ 10:00 am until 4:00 pm
* Friday ­ by appointment
* Saturday ­ closed

The Mor Gregorios Community Center is located at 1000 South Michigan Street,
in the white A-Frame building on the corner of Oak Hill and Michigan
Streets, across from the Webster Elementary School, in Plymouth, Indiana.
Their telephone number is (574) 540-2048.

The Mor Gregorios Community is under an allegiance with the Syriac Orthodox
Church lead by His Holiness Ignatius Zakka I Iwas and the Catholicose of
India, His Beatitude Baselios Thomas I. Their bishop is Archbishop John
Cassian Lewis of Columbus, Ohio. The executive director is Father
Theodosius Walker.

For more information, please contact Father Theodosius at (574) 540-2048, or
by email at monastery@synesius.com.

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Worker centers: Organizing communities at the edge of the dream (EPI briefing paper)

Worker centers: Organizing communities at the edge of the dream (EPI briefing paper)

Building a Workers' Center

Workers' centers have sprung up around the country in a variety of ways.

But they have all begun with some very basic first steps that include: contacting and developing relationships with local religious institutions (Where workers worship); building partnerships with local labor and employment attorneys (That can serve on steering committees, advise workers and donate $ to the center); building partnerships with labor enforcement agencies, such as Department of Labor, EEOC and OSHA (That can enforce complaints); and organized labor (that can help organize workers and donate $ to the center). Once these four basic foundations have been laid, the leaders in the project must decide how and when the center will open. Below are some of the most common models that have been used:

1.The Study -- Workers and academics partner to produce a study outlining the sweatshop working conditions in that community, workplace or sector of the industry. This study is made public at a press event in which there is also an announcement that a workers' center will be opened to address the problems outlined in the study. The study should use scientific methodology, but should primarily be a tool to reach out to workers and build a leadership team for the workers' center.

Some centers that were started in this manner:
Madison Workers' Rights Center
Restaurant Opportunities Center

2.The Community Coalition - In this model, religious leaders, workers and others in the community interested in starting a workers' center create a coalition of organizations on the ground who work with the target population. This coalition might include social service agencies, community organizing groups, religious institutions and employment attorneys. These organizations then create a strategic plan for the creation of the workers' center. Key leaders from each of the organizations form a steering committee that leads the creation of the workers' center.

Some centers that were started in this manner:
Cincinnati Interfaith Workers' Center
Houston Interfaith Worker Justice Center

3.The Workers' Rights Manual - Community leaders and workers produce a manual (or other education materials) that outlines the rights of all workers in their workplaces. An outreach plan is then devised in which the manual is distributed to the target population.

Some centers that were started in this manner:
Chicago Worker Rights Center
Western North Carolina Workers Center

Worker self-determination is a central principle of the IWJ Workers' Center Network, so regardless of which path people in your community choose, the key decision-making body of the workers' center should always be composed of workers or at least have a majority of workers.

source: http://www.iwj.org/index.cfm/building-a-workers-center

Interfaith Worker Justice - Unemployment and the Economic Crisis Toolkit

Interfaith Worker Justice - Unemployment and the Economic Crisis Toolkit

Standing with the Unemployed



 Jobs: The Number One Priority in 2010


 


 My sister and nearly half her co-workers lost their jobs this year at a progressive faith-based nonprofit organization. She had worked there for 15 years. No family has gone untouched by the economic crisis. Tens of millions of our brothers and sisters have lost their jobs and many millions more have lost health care benefits, had their hours and wages slashed, or fear that they will lose their jobs. Communities that were already devastated with plant closures and the loss of good manufacturing jobs have been hit harder than others. Unemployment rates are disastrous for people of color, young workers, and veterans.
 
 In last night's State of the Union address, President Obama called jobs the number one priority for 2010. He noted that more than seven million jobs have been lost in the U.S. over the past two years.
 
 The President and Congress cannot solve this crisis unless we all stand up together. Yes, we need to extend unemployment benefits and subsidies for COBRA health insurance purchase for unemployed workers. We need to pass a strong jobs bill that will help create sustainable jobs at living wages, and we need assistance targeted to hardest-hit communities. But as people of faith, we need to go beyond this to promote a full employment economy with good jobs that can support our families.
 
 Interfaith Worker Justice has created a congregational toolkit on unemployment and the economic crisis (the first link on our resource page for Unemployment and the Economic Crisis <http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=ZOaLyhcPG2vAax%2FbM%2BsSEc7XpDK%2BaGQy> ). It includes a refection on the spiritual meaning of the crisis, worship resources, and a guide to your rights following job loss that includes information about final paychecks, unemployment compensation, avoiding foreclosure, and health insurance. The toolkit also includes action steps that congregations can take, including a guide to setting up congregational support groups and jobs clubs, and ideas for how congregations can raise the prophetic and religious voice and take action in the public policy arena.
 
 Encouraged always by our faith, we can work together to ensure that all people have access to good jobs, living wages, and healthcare. Now is the time to raise our hearts and our voices as people of faith. Now is the time to stand with the unemployed in solidarity and hope, sustained by our commitment to building a future where everyone has the opportunity to work with dignity and respect.
 
 


Wednesday, January 20, 2010

JoeOnTheMove.com

JoeOnTheMove.com
Low cost calling cards for deployed servicemen and women. Check out the site. Let us know what you think. If you have other resources for deployed service men and women to use, please let us know so that we can list them as well.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

The new greatest generation

"My grandfather's generation is always called the 'greatest generation,' " says Army Capt. Jason Adler, 33, commander of Charlie Company, where Martin is one of his platoon leaders. "I disagree. It's these men here who go to war three or four times and continue to do what's asked of them, when others refuse."
Army Staff Sgt. Bobby Martin Jr. has been fighting insurgents in Iraq or Afhanistan longer than the entire three years the Korean War lasted.

At age 34 and finishing a fourth combat tour, he has seen five of his men killed since 2003. Four died this year, including two on Martin's birthday in May. Thirty-eight cumulative months in combat have left him with bad knees, aching shins and recurring headaches from a roadside blast, ailments he hides from his soldiers.

Out of earshot of his troops, Martin concedes, "This is a lot of wear and tear."

American soldiers of the 21st century are quietly making history, serving in combat longer than almost any U.S. soldiers in the nation's past, military historians say.

For many, the fighting seems without end, a fatalism increasingly shared by most Americans. A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll conducted late last week found that 67% believe the U.S. will constantly have combat troops fighting somewhere in the world for at least the next 20 years.

President Obama is sending 30,000 more troops here, expanding a war that by the end of 2010 will be the nation's longest.

The cycles of combat have been so long and so frequent that nearly 13,000 soldiers now have spent three to four cumulative years at war in Iraq or Afghanistan, according to Army records. About 500 GIs have spent more than four years in combat, the Army says.

"Undoubtedly this is unprecedented," says Stephen Maxner, a military historian and director of the Vietnam Center and Archive in Lubbock, Texas.

He says small numbers of soldiers volunteered for multiple tours in Vietnam, but the vast majority served single, year-long deployments in that longest of American wars.

"My grandfather's generation is always called the 'greatest generation,' " says Army Capt. Jason Adler, 33, commander of Charlie Company, where Martin is one of his platoon leaders. "I disagree. It's these men here who go to war three or four times and continue to do what's asked of them, when others refuse."

Fewer than two in 10 soldiers on their first or second combat deployment showed signs of mental illness or reported marital problems, according to battlefield research in Afghanistan completed last year. The rate increased to three in 10 soldiers for those on a third or fourth deployment.

Leaders such as Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, acknowledge the increasing stress on the military.

Suicides are at record levels. The divorce rate among enlisted soldiers has steadily increased during the war years. Rates of mental health and prescription drug abuse are on the rise.

With a growing number of injured or wounded soldiers, painkillers are now the most abused drug in the Army. One in four GIs admit to illicitly using narcotic medication during a 12-month period, according to a 2008 Pentagon health survey.

"It speaks pretty well to the fortitude of these folks that they just keep coming back for more," says James Willbanks, director of military history at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan. "But it's difficult to watch, because it's really hard on them, and very, very difficult on the families."

Martin finished his fourth combat tour and rejoined his family on Dec. 31. In the years away at war, Martin missed the birth of his son, Bobby Martin III, 3, in 2006, and has been away for two-thirds of the child's life.

Spc. Shamont Simpson, 28, is another soldier in Charlie Company completing a fourth deployment. He has racked up 42 months, rivaling the 45 months it took the United States to fight World War II or the 48 months the Civil War lasted. Simpson says he barely knows his 7-year-old son, Stefon, from a first marriage.

Both soldiers serve with the 3rd Brigade Combat Team of the 10th Mountain Division out of Fort Drum, N.Y. The division's 1st Brigade Combat Team, about 3,500, deploys to Afghanistan this spring with 20 soldiers on a fifth combat tour and five beginning a sixth deployment, says Staff Sgt. John Queen, a brigade spokesman.

"(I'm) just tired," Simpson says. "Physically tired, mentally tired."

The increasing toll

Without a clear indication of when the USA will once again be at peace, Army research shows that the strain on soldiers can otherwise be eased with extended breaks between deployments. The longer soldiers rest, the better they endure.

When time at home stretches to two years, morale increases and cases of mental illness decline, the research shows.

"(But) it's a very tough trade-off to make," says Army Col. Carl Castro, a psychologist, "between fulfilling operational missions and giving soldiers time to recover."

The Army's aim is to allow two years of recovery for every year in combat. Given the current pace of war, however, it will be a "couple of more years" before that goal is met, says Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. For those in the infantry, who do so much of the fighting, a return to combat often comes within a year.

Meanwhile, soldiers must return to war again and again because the size of the nation's all-volunteer force is limited, Army leaders say. In the past, the government could grow the Army quickly through conscription, allowing the burden of war to be shared by more people.

"It's quite unusual, the inequality," says Christopher Hamner, a military historian at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. "You've got the vast majority of the American military-aged population that is being asked to do virtually nothing in these two conflicts. And then a very small percentage is being asked to shoulder enormous burdens."

This leaves many soldiers suspicious that other GIs are avoiding combat duty.

"I feel some guys are hiding. Some guys don't want to go. And I think that the people around them just take care of them," says Martin, whose first two combat tours in Iraq were with the Marine Corps before he joined the Army. "(For) us on the line, it's hard to get an assignment to get out."

"The big Army," says Simpson, "they got you in a unit that deploys, they'd rather keep you there then bring somebody in who hasn't."

While there is a need to keep combat-experienced troops in the field, Army commanders say no one is allowed to avoid war duty.

"Every day, we are out there working to identify and to move non-deploying soldiers into deploying formations," says Army Col. Jon Finke, director of the office that manages enlisted assignments.

For the past six years, the percentage of soldiers at any given moment who have not gone to war has held steady at about 32% of the Army, says Louis Henkel, deputy director of the management office.

However, Army records show that when the service accounts for soldiers in training, preparing to deploy, serving overseas in places such as South Korea, in poor health or assigned as drill sergeants or recruiters, there are fewer than 15,000 who can be tapped to fill in for the combat veterans.

These are soldiers who work at the Pentagon and elsewhere, and only a few hundred of those are infantry, says Lt. Col. Douglas DeLancey, who supervises infantry assignments. Most are medical, aviation or military intelligence personnel, Army statistics show.

"We absolutely believe the numbers (available to fill in overseas) are small," Finke says.

The result is that many requests for a break from combat, such as those Martin and Simpson made after their third deployments, are turned down.

The Army has asked the RAND Corp., an independent think tank with ties to the military, to study the issue and find better ways to spell weary war veterans, says Joe Dougherty, a RAND spokesman.

Keeping troops focused

Comparing the soldiers experience for long and hard fighting in different wars is "an imperfect calculus," says Don Wright, a historian and research chief at the Army's Combat Studies Institute. Combat in Iraq and Afghanistan is not as consistently intense as other major American wars, historians say.

But the strain of long and repeated exposures to combat is what makes these current wars historically unique, they say.

"What is exceptional ... is the repeated deployments," says Pulitzer Prize-winning Civil War historian James McPherson.

He says the average Civil War tour of duty was about 2½ years, with small numbers serving for the duration.

"These (current deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan) may take a greater physical and psychological toll than a single deployment, even if the latter is longer," McPherson says.

For the young recruits pouring into the Army and shipping off to combat for the first time, however, these veterans guide the way. The young soldiers of Martin's platoon see him as a disciplinarian whose stern voice keeps them centered during an ambush or when a roadside bomb explodes.

"He's going to be calm so you yourself are not going to panic," says Spc. Don Ezra Plemons, the platoon medic.

"He never wavers. He doesn't show that he's hurt. ... He's always a leader," says Staff Sgt. Kenneth Brook, the company medic, who seeks out Martin for counseling when the stress gets hard.

Simpson has a similar reputation. When a renegade Afghan National Army soldier opened fire with an AK-47 on Oct. 2, killing two American GIs and wounding three, Simpson was first on the scene and moved rapidly to staunch the bleeding of a mortally wounded sergeant.

Pfc. James Radovich, 21, was right behind him, marveling at Simpson's composure and focus amid the blood and chaos.

"He was very calm doing what he had to do. ... He had it under control," Radovich says. "Anything he would say, I would do without hesitation."

But families of both men, weary of the long absences, say the Army needs to relax its grip on these men.

"You keep planning for him to come home," says Joyce Sellars, of her son, Shamont, "and he comes home once, and he comes home twice and he comes home the third time. And you wonder, Lord is this (next) time, the time I'm not going to see my child again."

"It's like, when is this going to end?" his wife Faith Martin says.

It may be soon. Martin has finally been promised a training assignment to Fort Shelby in Mississippi and a period away from war.

"We need this time to work on us and our family," says his wife.

Simpson is guardedly optimistic that he, too, will step out the cycle of combat for a while. So far, he says, "I've got pretty good feedback."

source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2010-01-12-four-army-war-tours_N.htm

Army wives with deployed husbands suffer higher mental health issues

Wives of soldiers sent to war suffered significantly higher rates of mental health issues than those whose husbands stayed home, according to the largest study ever done on the emotional impact of war on Army wives.

Those rates were higher among wives whose husband deployed longer than 11 months, according to findings that will be published Thursday in the New England Journal of Medicine.

For example, wives of soldiers deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan between one and 11 months had an 18% higher rate of suffering from depression than those whose husbands did not go to war, the study shows. When soldiers were deployed 11 months or longer, their wives had a 24% higher rate of suffering from depression.

The study looked at more than 250,000 Army wives, of which two-thirds had husbands who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan between 2003 and 2006.

"Mental health effects of current operations are extending beyond soldiers and into their immediate families," the study concludes.

"There's a very clear relationship between deployment and these mental health diagnoses in these women," said Alyssa Mansfield, an epidemiologist with RTI International, a non-profit research organization, and lead author on the study. "We find that these women are experiencing greater mental health problems and there's a need for services for them."

The study shows again "that when a servicemember deploys, the entire family deploys," said Air Force Maj. April Cunningham, a Pentagon spokeswoman.

She identified several programs designed to help families including Military OneSource, a hotline — 800-342-9647 — and Web-based program that provides counseling.

The study likely underestimates the mental impact of deployments on wives, Cunningham and Mansfield said, in part because of the continuing stigma within the military about seeking mental health care.

"We know there's a stigma," Deborah Mullen, wife of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen, said at a suicide conference Wednesday. "Spouses tell me all the time that they would like to get mental health assistance, but they really believe — as incorrect as this is … that if they seek help, that it will have a negative impact on their spouse's military career."

The results of the Journal study reflect findings in a RAND Corp. study of military children, said Joyce Raezer, director of the National Military Family Association, which sponsored the study. Children of deployed parents suffer more emotional issues, particularly if separations are long or the parent at home is troubled, says the study, which was published last month.

"What worries me (is that) … kids do worse when Mom does worse," Raezer said. "So if spouses are more likely to need mental health services as deployment times increase, than their kids are more at risk."

Researchers in the Journal study identified how many additional cases of mental health diagnoses among wives were generated by the deployments of their husbands, findings which they said could help the Pentagon budget for additional mental health resources for families.

"What they should take away from this is that we may need to devote more services for the prevention of some of these problems," Mansfield said.

source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-13-Army-wives_N.htm

Open Mike Night at the Mor Gregorios Community Center

The next Open Mike night at the Mor Gregorios Community Center will be Friday, February 5, 2010. Any one with a strange or an ordinary talent is invited to attend and perform.  Poets, jugglers, musicians, singers, comedians are all invited.  The Open Mike starts at 7:00 pm in the Great Room.  You do not need a talent to attend and be entertained.  If your talent is listening, you are also invited.  The evening’s entertainment is free.
 
Refreshments will be available and those coming early are invited to join us in some awesome homemade soup in the Trapeza of the Cave.
 
The center’s computer center will also be open that evening.
 
The Mor Gregorios Community Center is located at 1000 South Michigan Street, Plymouth, Indiana.  The center is located in the white A-frame building on the corner of Oak Hill and Michigan streets across from the Webster Elementary School.
 
For more information, you can call the center at 574-540-2048, or by email at monastery@synesius.com

Monday, January 11, 2010

REFLECTIONS ON THE MARCH FOR LIFE 2008

By Rev. Fr. David G. Subu The Veil February 2008, reprinted in Solia: The Herald March 2008
This year I again attended the annual March for Life on the Mall, on January 22nd. It was very heartening to see so many people, a “multitude that could not be counted.” Estimates range over 100,000 marchers. Maybe double even that, and I wouldn’t be surprised. I could see neither a beginning nor an end to the crowd anywhere.
What was also beautiful was the vast number of young people, teens and college students, which perhaps made up at least half the group. I’m encouraged by them because they are learning early on and in greater and greater number that abortion is no real choice at all, but a systematic failure of society to provide for and protect its most vulnerable, both children and parents. They understand that this choice is pushed upon them by a culture that does not really wish to face the consequences of its own sinfulness, a society that does not want to deal with their “little problem,” and provide real alternatives.
Perhaps they are so much more aware now than my generation was at that age because now it is no longer a theoretical debate on the ethics of the issue. Now we have the stark reality of 43 million+ abortions effected in this nation alone, countless men and women wounded, “aborted” mothers and fathers who now know the truth, who have felt the pain and hopelessness of their “choice,” and aren’t afraid to talk about it. Instead of building generations of responsible, ethical young adults, we’ve actually increased their irresponsibility, immorality, and irreverence for life. And many of them, in the innocence of youth, are disgusted with us for it. Good for them!
I was also humbled by our small Orthodox contingent, miniscule in comparison to the Roman Catholic juggernaut that dominates the pro-life movement. I was bemused by what they must all think when our all-too-small cadre of bishops get up on the stage in their impressive black robes and kamilavki (hats) like some medieval clerical Mafiosi. We cannot compete with the fire of the AME pastor, the salt of the Brooklyn Rabbi Levin, the masses of the Catholics, and the blare of the contemporary Christian singers. But I am glad we are there, as foolish as we seem and sometimes even feel. But I also wish more of us were there.
You know that I, as your priest, in comparison to some, do not make many political pronouncements. It is not because I am not convinced or convicted of any ideals, but rather perhaps because I respect that each of you may or may not be as well. I consider carefully my position as your pastor. While I know for myself, I am a pro-lifer, and that pretty much certain positions are a deal-breaker for my being able to vote for certain candidates, I would never tell you that you cannot consider yourself a Christian because of your political views or whom you wish to vote for.
None of those who serve have clean hands, and even our most pro-life leaders often make unsavory compromises. I always remember St. Constantine the Great, who nevertheless because of the duties of state and the moral burden of his actions as ruler, chose to forestall baptism until the end of his life. Yet he is a saint. For these reasons I am unashamed to confess that I am a diehard independent, and that my vote will always have to be earned. I encourage you all to approach things the same way!
At the same time, I refuse to be told that a priest should keep his nose out of things, and that his job is only to teach spiritual things, and leave the earthly to the rest. I would not be much of a shepherd if, when I saw the wolves and the snakes bearing down, I didn’t stop and stand and warn all of you, the flock entrusted to me.
So I offer my reflections to you in the hopes of inspiring a bit of a pro-life worldview in you, that you might hold accountable not only those whom our country elects to office but also yourself in all the ways of your conduct. To be truly pro-life is not just about those for whom we vote, though it really cannot be separated from it.
To be pro-life is to hold an entire worldview that sees life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as gifts from our Creator to be cherished and protected for all. It means taking some personal responsibility to create a more compassionate and, yes, Christian world in which sinners can find forgiveness and assistance in healing from abortion, also supporting our terrified and unprepared mothers and fathers (for whether they know it or not, this what they are as soon as conception occurs) so that they do not commit to abortion and live for fear.
It also means defending the elderly and the infirm, the terminally ill, the disabled, and children not just with lips but with loving presence, visitation, acts of charity performed with hands and hugs and smiles and not just checkbooks. It means being able to accept the sin in our own families and not trying to make our children appear as above the reality of pre-marital indiscretions. Remembering that 25% or so of abortions are for married women past their early 20’s, we need to give the encouragement to our peers be pro-family and even pro-big-family, being mindful of what is happening in Europe where birth rates have declined so much that western civilization has with them.
Let us stand up for some “truth in advertising.” Let us not allow any politicians to tell us that they can be against the ban on partial birth abortion “because there was no exception for the health of the mother,” when we already know that there is no medically necessary instance in which this horrific procedure occurs. Let’s call pandering to the abortion industry and its powerful lobby for what it is.
Let us also stop the lie that being against embryonic stem cell research and human cloning is callous and insensitive to those with incurable disease, when not a single effective treatment has come out of that type of research for 20 years—compared with hundreds to arise from the use of more stable and perfectly ethical research with adult stem cells. (Follow the money and you’ll see what it’s really about.)
Let us stop the lie that being pro-choice helps our nation’s poor black families, for African-Americans babies are aborted twice as often as others, and the community has actually disintegrated farther since Roe v. Wade. Let’s instead see some real welfare reform and some real immigration enforcement so there can be stable jobs and stable families in those hurting communities.
Let us stop the abhorrent, eugenic lie that aborting children with disorders like Down’s syndrome is doing them some kind of favor, and that somehow, the very rare situations like these justify keeping abortion legal on demand during all nine months of pregnancy in all 50 states.
Let us stop turning a blind eye when our government makes deals with other nations whose pro-life and human rights records are even more grievous than ours in the name of diplomacy and making America strong. Only one power can make any nation stand. If we renounce Him, we are lost. The crass and callous spirit of our age that fuels the abortion industry has equal representation on both sides of the aisle, just as it is equally present in us if we do not repent now and change our world from the inside out.
To be pro-life means a lot more than for whom you vote. It also means what you stand for and what you expect from yourself, your family, your community, your nation. I hope all of you will consider rethinking your worldview, whether conservative or liberal or otherwise in politics, and start making a difference, so that eventually, there will be no more need for a March for Life.

Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Did Christianity Cause the Crash?

America’s mainstream religious denominations used to teach the faithful that they would be rewarded in the afterlife. But over the past generation, a different strain of Christian faith has proliferated—one that promises to make believers rich in the here and now. Known as the prosperity gospel, and claiming tens of millions of adherents, it fosters risk-taking and intense material optimism. It pumped air into the housing bubble. And one year into the worst downturn since the Depression, it’s still going strong.

by Hanna Rosin

Did Christianity Cause the Crash?

Image credit: Mark Peterson/Redux

Like the ambitions of many immigrants who attend services there, Casa del Padre’s success can be measured by upgrades in real estate. The mostly Latino church, in Charlottesville, Virginia, has moved from the pastor’s basement, where it was founded in 2001, to a rented warehouse across the street from a small mercado five years later, to a middle-class suburban street last year, where the pastor now rents space from a lovely old Baptist church that can’t otherwise fill its pews. Every Sunday, the parishioners drive slowly into the parking lot, never parking on the sidewalk or grass—“because Americanos don’t do that,” one told me—and file quietly into church. Some drive newly leased SUVs, others old work trucks with paint buckets still in the bed. The pastor, Fernando Garay, arrives last and parks in front, his dark-blue Mercedes Benz always freshly washed, the hubcaps polished enough to reflect his wingtips.

It can be hard to get used to how much Garay talks about money in church, one loyal parishioner, Billy Gonzales, told me one recent Sunday on the steps out front. Back in Mexico, Gonzales’s pastor talked only about “Jesus and heaven and being good.” But Garay talks about jobs and houses and making good money, which eventually came to make sense to Gonzales: money is “really important,” and besides, “we love the money in Jesus Christ’s name! Jesus loved money too!” That Sunday, Garay was preaching a variation on his usual theme, about how prosperity and abundance unerringly find true believers. “It doesn’t matter what country you’re from, what degree you have, or what money you have in the bank,” Garay said. “You don’t have to say, ‘God, bless my business. Bless my bank account.’ The blessings will come! The blessings are looking for you! God will take care of you. God will not let you be without a house!”

Pastor Garay, 48, is short and stocky, with thick black hair combed back. In his off hours, he looks like a contented tourist, in his printed Hawaiian shirts or bright guayaberas. But he preaches with a ferocity that taps into his youth as a cocaine dealer with a knife in his back pocket. “Fight the attack of the devil on my finances! Fight him! We declare financial blessings! Financial miracles this week, NOW NOW NOW!” he preached that Sunday. “More work! Better work! The best finances!” Gonzales shook and paced as the pastor spoke, eventually leaving his wife and three kids in the family section to join the single men toward the front, many of whom were jumping, raising their Bibles, and weeping. On the altar sat some anointing oils, alongside the keys to the Mercedes Benz.

Later, D’andry Then, a trim, pretty real-estate agent and one of the church founders, stood up to give her testimony. Business had not been good of late, and “you know, Monday I have to pay this, and Tuesday I have to pay that.” Then, just that morning, “Jesus gave me $1,000.” She didn’t explain whether the gift came in the form of a real-estate commission or a tax refund or a stuffed envelope left at her door. The story hung somewhere between metaphor and a literal image of barefoot Jesus handing her a pile of cash. No one in the church seemed the least bit surprised by the story, and certainly no one expressed doubt. “If you have financial pressure on you, and you don’t know where the next payment is coming from, don’t pay any attention to that!” she continued. “Don’t get discouraged! Jesus is the answer.”

America’s churches always reflect shifts in the broader culture, and Casa del Padre is no exception. The message that Jesus blesses believers with riches first showed up in the postwar years, at a time when Americans began to believe that greater comfort could be accessible to everyone, not just the landed class. But it really took off during the boom years of the 1990s, and has continued to spread ever since. This stitched-together, homegrown theology, known as the prosperity gospel, is not a clearly defined denomination, but a strain of belief that runs through the Pentecostal Church and a surprising number of mainstream evangelical churches, with varying degrees of intensity. In Garay’s church, God is the “Owner of All the Silver and Gold,” and with enough faith, any believer can access the inheritance. Money is not the dull stuff of hourly wages and bank-account statements, but a magical substance that comes as a gift from above. Even in these hard times, it is discouraged, in such churches, to fall into despair about the things you cannot afford. “Instead of saying ‘I’m poor,’ say ‘I’m rich,’” Garay’s wife, Hazael, told me one day. “The word of God will manifest itself in reality.”

Many explanations have been offered for the housing bubble and subsequent crash: interest rates were too low; regulation failed; rising real-estate prices induced a sort of temporary insanity in America’s middle class. But there is one explanation that speaks to a lasting and fundamental shift in American culture—a shift in the American conception of divine Providence and its relationship to wealth.

In his book Something for Nothing, Jackson Lears describes two starkly different manifestations of the American dream, each intertwined with religious faith. The traditional Protestant hero is a self-made man. He is disciplined and hardworking, and believes that his “success comes through careful cultivation of (implicitly Protestant) virtues in cooperation with a Providential plan.” The hero of the second American narrative is a kind of gambling man—a “speculative confidence man,” Lears calls him, who prefers “risky ventures in real estate,” and a more “fluid, mobile democracy.” The self-made man imagines a coherent universe where earthly rewards match merits. The confidence man lives in a culture of chance, with “grace as a kind of spiritual luck, a free gift from God.” The Gilded Age launched the myth of the self-made man, as the Rockefellers and other powerful men in the pews connected their wealth to their own virtue. In these boom-and-crash years, the more reckless alter ego dominates. In his book, Lears quotes a reverend named Jeffrey Black, who sounds remarkably like Garay: “The whole hope of a human being is that somehow, in spite of the things I’ve done wrong, there will be an episode when grace and fate shower down on me and an unearned blessing will come to me—that I’ll be the one.”

I had come to Charlottesville to learn more about this second strain of the American dream—one that’s been ascendant for a generation or more. I wanted to try to piece together the connection between the gospel and today’s economic reality, and to see whether “prosperity” could possibly still seem enticing, or even plausible, in this distinctly unprosperous moment. (Very much so, as it turns out.) Charlottesville may not be the heartland of the prosperity gospel, which is most prevalent in the Sun Belt—where many of the country’s foreclosure hot spots also lie. And Garay preaches an unusually pure version of the gospel. Still, the particulars of both Garay and his congregation are revealing.

Among Latinos the prosperity gospel has been spreading rapidly. In a recent Pew survey, 73 percent of all religious Latinos in the United States agreed with the statement: “God will grant financial success to all believers who have enough faith.” For a generation of poor and striving Latino immigrants, the gospel seems to offer a road map to affluence and modern living. Garay’s church is comprised mostly of first-generation immigrants. More than others I’ve visited, it echoes back a highly distilled, unself-conscious version of the current thinking on what it means to live the American dream.

One other thing makes Garay’s church a compelling case study. From 2001 to 2007, while he was building his church, Garay was also a loan officer at two different mortgage companies. He was hired explicitly to reach out to the city’s growing Latino community, and Latinos, as it happened, were disproportionately likely to take out the sort of risky loans that later led to so many foreclosures. To many of his parishioners, Garay was not just a spiritual adviser, but a financial one as well.

Many of the terms and concepts used by prosperity preachers today date back to Oral Roberts, a poor farmer’s son turned Pentecostal preacher. Garay grew up watching Roberts on television and considers him a hero; he hopes to send all three of his children to Oral Roberts University, in Tulsa, Oklahoma. In the late 1940s, Roberts claimed his Bible flipped open to the Third Epistle of John, verse 2: “Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health. Even as thy soul prospereth.” Soon Roberts developed his famous concept of seed faith, still popular today. If people would donate money to his ministry, a “seed” offered to God, he’d say, then God would multiply it a hundredfold. Eventually, Roberts retreated into a life that revolved around private jets and country clubs.

Roberts’s fame had faded by the late 1980s, and prosperity preaching briefly imploded soon after. We all remember Tammy Faye Bakker and her mascara tears, along with her husband, Jim, and his various scandals. They took their place in a procession of slick, showy faith healers on Christian television who ultimately succumbed to earthly temptation.

But since that time, the movement has made itself over, moving out of the fringe and into the upwardly mobile megachurch class. In the past decade, it has produced about a dozen celebrity pastors, who show up at White House events, on secular radio, and as guests on major TV talk shows. Kirbyjon Caldwell, a Methodist megapastor in Houston and a purveyor of the prosperity gospel, gave the benediction at both of George W. Bush’s inaugurals. Instead of shiny robes or gaudy jewelry, these preachers wear Italian suits and modest wedding bands. Instead of screaming and sweating, they smile broadly and speak in soothing, therapeutic terms. But their message is essentially the same. “Every day, you’re going to live that abundant life!” preaches Joel Osteen, a best-selling author, the nation’s most popular TV preacher, and the pastor of Lakewood Church, in Houston, the country’s largest church by far.

Among mainstream, nondenominational megachurches, where much of American religious life takes place, “prosperity is proliferating” rapidly, says Kate Bowler, a doctoral candidate at Duke University and an expert in the gospel. Few, if any, of these churches have prosperity in their title or mission statement, but Bowler has analyzed their sermons and teachings. Of the nation’s 12 largest churches, she says, three are prosperity—Osteen’s, which dwarfs all the other megachurches; Tommy Barnett’s, in Phoenix; and T. D. Jakes’s, in Dallas. In second-tier churches—those with about 5,000 members—the prosperity gospel dominates. Overall, Bowler classifies 50 of the largest 260 churches in the U.S. as prosperity. The doctrine has become popular with Americans of every background and ethnicity; overall, Pew found that 66 percent of all Pentecostals and 43 percent of “other Christians”—a category comprising roughly half of all respondents—believe that wealth will be granted to the faithful. It’s an upbeat theology, argues Barbara Ehrenreich in her new book, Bright-Sided, that has much in common with the kind of “positive thinking” that has come to dominate America’s boardrooms and, indeed, its entire culture.

On the cover of his 4 million-copy best seller from 2004, Your Best Life Now, Joel Osteen looks like a recent college grad who just got hired by Goldman Sachs and can’t believe his good luck. His hair is full, his teeth are bright, his suit is polished but not flashy; he looks like a guy who would more likely shake your hand than cast out your demons. Osteen took over his father’s church in 1999. He had little preaching experience, although he’d managed the television ministry for years. The church grew quickly, as Osteen packaged himself to appeal to the broadest audience possible. In his books and sermons, Osteen quotes very little scripture, opting instead to tell uplifting personal anecdotes. He avoids controversy, and rarely appears on Christian TV. In a popular YouTube clip, he declines to confirm Larry King’s suggestion that only those who believe in Jesus will go to heaven.




Video: Watch a clip from Joel Osteen’s Larry King appearance


Osteen is often derided as Christianity Lite, but he is more like Positivity Extreme. “Cast down anything negative, any thought that brings fear, worry, doubt, or unbelief,” he urges. “Your attitude should be: ‘I refuse to go backward. I am going forward with God. I am going to be the person he wants me to be. I’m going to fulfill my destiny.’” Telling yourself you are poor, or broke, or stuck in a dead-end job is a form of sin and “invites more negativity into your life,” he writes. Instead, you have to “program your mind for success,” wake up every morning and tell yourself, “God is guiding and directing my steps.” The advice is exactly like the message of The Secret, or any number of American self-help blockbusters that edge toward magical thinking, except that the religious context adds another dimension.

Your Best Life Now, which has fueled a TV show that Osteen claims is now seen in 200 million homes worldwide, opens with a story of a man on vacation in Hawaii. He was “a good man who had achieved a modest measure of success, but he was coasting along, thinking that he’d already reached his limits.” While sightseeing, he and his wife admired a gorgeous house on a hill. “I can’t even imagine living in a place like that,” he said. For this bit of self-deprecation and modesty, Osteen pities the man: “His own thoughts and attitudes,” he writes, “were condemning him to mediocrity,” or what is known in the gospel as the “defeated life.”

A few pages later comes the corrective, the model of a “victor” and not a “victim.” Osteen and his wife, Victoria, are walking around their neighborhood in Houston when they pass a beautiful house being built. “Most of the other homes around us were one-story, ranch-style homes that were forty to fifty years old, but this house was a large two-story home, with high ceilings and oversized windows,” he writes. “It was a lovely, inspiring place.” Victoria desperately wanted a house “just like it,” but Joel was worried about how stretched they already were. “Thinking of our bank account and my income at the time, it seemed impossible to me,” he writes. But this, of course, is an example of ungodly, negative thinking. With her unwavering faith, Victoria wouldn’t let it drop. Soon she convinced Joel and then he, too, started to believe that “God could bring it to pass.” There is no explanation of how they came to own such a house—whether Osteen worked hard to grow his ministry or got rich from his TV show or received an inheritance from his father’s estate. In this story they are standing in for an average middle-class couple who set their sights on a bigger house and believed, despite all the financial evidence, that God would bestow it upon them, like a gift. And he did.

Theologically, the prosperity gospel has always infuriated many mainstream evangelical pastors. Rick Warren, whose book The Purpose Driven Life outsold Osteen’s, told Time, “This idea that God wants everybody to be wealthy? There is a word for that: baloney. It’s creating a false idol. You don’t measure your self-worth by your net worth. I can show you millions of faithful followers of Christ who live in poverty. Why isn’t everyone in the church a millionaire?” In 2005, a group of African American pastors met to denounce prosperity megapreachers for promoting a Jesus who is more like a “cosmic bellhop,” as one pastor put it, than the engaged Jesus of the civil-rights era who looked after the poor.

More recently, critics have begun to argue that the prosperity gospel, echoed in churches across the country, might have played a part in the economic collapse. In 2008, in the online magazine Religion Dispatches, Jonathan Walton, a professor of religious studies at the University of California at Riverside, warned:

Narratives of how “God blessed me with my first house despite my credit” were common … Sermons declaring “It’s your season of overflow” supplanted messages of economic sobriety and disinterested sacrifice. Yet as folks were testifying about “what God can do,” little attention was paid to a predatory subprime-mortgage industry, relaxed credit standards, or the dangers of using one’s home equity as an ATM.

In 2004, Walton was researching a book about black televangelists. “I would hear consistent testimonies about how ‘once I was renting and now God let me own my own home,’ or ‘I was afraid of the loan officer, but God directed him to ignore my bad credit and blessed me with my first home,’” he says. “This trope was so common in these churches that I just became immune to it. Only later did I connect it to this disaster.”

Demographically, the growth of the prosperity gospel tracks fairly closely to the pattern of foreclosure hot spots. Both spread in two particular kinds of communities—the exurban middle class and the urban poor. Many newer prosperity churches popped up around fringe suburban developments built in the 1990s and 2000s, says Walton. These are precisely the kinds of neighborhoods that have been decimated by foreclosures, according to Eric Halperin, of the Center for Responsible Lending.

Zooming out a bit, Kate Bowler found that most new prosperity-gospel churches were built along the Sun Belt, particularly in California, Florida, and Arizona—all areas that were hard-hit by the mortgage crisis. Bowler, who, like Walton, was researching a book, spent a lot of time attending the “financial empowerment” seminars that are common at prosperity churches. Advisers would pay lip service to “sound financial practices,” she recalls, but overall they would send the opposite message: posters advertising the seminars featured big houses in the background, and the parking spots closest to the church were reserved for luxury cars.

Nationally, the prosperity gospel has spread exponentially among African American and Latino congregations. This is also the other distinct pattern of foreclosures. “Hyper-segregated” urban communities were the worst off, says Halperin. Reliable data on foreclosures by race are not publicly available, but mortgages are tracked by both race and loan type, and subprime loans have tended to correspond to foreclosures. During the boom, roughly 40 percent of all loans going to Latinos nationwide were subprime loans; Latinos and African Americans were 28 percent and 37 percent more likely, respectively, to receive a higher-rate subprime loan than whites.

In June, the Supreme Court ruled that state attorneys general had the authority to sue national banks for predatory lending. Even before that ruling, at least 17 lawsuits accusing various banks of treating racial minorities unfairly were already under way. (Bank of America’s Countrywide division—one of the companies Garay worked for—had earlier agreed to pay $8.4 billion in a multistate settlement.) One theme emerging in these suits is how banks teamed up with pastors to win over new customers for subprime loans.

Beth Jacobson is a star witness for the City of Baltimore’s recent suit against Wells Fargo. Jacobson was a top loan officer in the bank’s subprime division for nine years, closing as much as $55 million worth of loans a year. Like many subprime-loan officers, Jacobson had no bank experience before working for Wells Fargo. The subprime officers were drawn from “an utterly different background” than the professional bankers, she told me. She had been running a small paralegal business; her co-workers had been car salespeople, or had worked in telemarketing. They were prized for their ability to hustle on the ground and “look you in the eye when they shook your hand,” she surmised. As a reward for good performance, the bank would sometimes send a Hummer limo to pick up Jacobson for a celebration, she said. She’d arrive at a bar and find all her co-workers drunk and her boss “doing body shots off a waitress.”

The idea of reaching out to churches took off quickly, Jacobson recalls. The branch managers figured pastors had a lot of influence with their parishioners and could give the loan officers credibility and new customers. Jacobson remembers a conference call where sales managers discussed the new strategy. The plan was to send officers to guest-speak at church-sponsored “wealth-building seminars” like the ones Bowler attended, and dazzle the participants with the possibility of a new house. They would tell pastors that for every person who took out a mortgage, $350 would be donated to the church, or to a charity of the parishioner’s choice. “They wouldn’t say, ‘Hey, Mr. Minister. We want to give your people a bunch of subprime loans,” Jacobson told me. “They would say, ‘Your congregants will be homeowners! They will be able to live the American dream!’”

Garay often tells his life story from the pulpit, as an inspiration to the many immigrants in his church, some legal, some not. He grew up an outsider—a citizen by birth, but living a marginal existence in a diverse, working-class neighborhood in Flushing, Queens. His mother left when he was 8, and he was raised mostly by two older brothers; he spent most of his time on the street. “I ate jars of peanut butter for dinner,” he says. The story of how he became a Christian begins in 1989, when he was 28 years old, and involves a large sum of money. He’d been selling drugs in Miami, then started using, and owed some dealers $30,000 that he didn’t have, and they were going to kill him. He was on his mattress one night, in despair, when a picture of Jesus up on his wall “winked at me.” Soon after, he became a born-again Christian, and he told everyone about it. The dealers, he says, then went away. He doesn’t offer much explanation; he just says, “They were after me. They were going to kill me. And then they just backed off.” He credits Jesus.

Garay tried many churches, but they all felt alien and “dead” to him. “That’s not me, sitting quietly and saying ‘Thank you, God.’” Finally he came upon a Pentecostal prosperity church, much like the one he leads now. The church was full of miracles and real emotion, which drew him in, but it also offered practical benefits. The pastor pointed out Bible passages that referred to finances in specific terms, giving him images of wealth he could almost reach out and touch: “Give, and it shall be given to you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over”—a passage that’s now often read at Garay’s church during tithing time.

“Then it started happening. It started happening!” He enrolled in a community college and began selling roses from buckets in the backseat of his Honda (“no AC, no radio”). In no time, as he tells it, he had worked himself up to roses in plastic straws, laid neatly across the backseat of his Cadillac, with no water sloshing on the white leather. With this story, Garay hopes to convince his followers that God has a bounty for them, but that to get it they have to take the first step of faith. One analogy he likes to use is a box of gifts in heaven; if you never reach up to get it, then it won’t come down to you. It’s a curious mix of active (a step of faith) and passive (“It started happening!”).

In Garay’s testimony, his life proceeds that way: part hard work, part miracle. He applied himself, eventually got married, and had children. One day, for no reason, he quit his job as a social worker counseling addicted juvenile delinquents. “I almost hit him with a frying pan,” Hazael, his wife, jokes. But the very same day, his mother-in-law walked into the house and said the bank was looking for a bilingual loan officer. He had no experience and had never used a computer. Yet he got the job and within a year was earning six figures. How did that happen? How did it all come together so neatly, one door opening the moment another had closed? When I asked him that, he smiled and pointed up at the sky.

Garay is like a father figure to his parishioners; I met a few who had named their children after him or his wife. Parishioners told me stories about his coming with them to their court hearings, showing them how to buy a phone card or find a good school for their children or, for the more entrepreneurial, invest in a small business. Oral Roberts’s seed-faith concept is the source of much suspicion about prosperity churches; pastors, including Garay, ask their parishioners to give 10 percent of their income to the church. But to Garay, seed faith is the church’s central tenet. The tithe, he says, is tangible proof that a believer has taken the first step toward God. It is the spiritual equivalent of spending three years selling flowers door-to-door. He often tells what’s known as Jesus’ parable of the three servants, from Matthew. A lord gives three of his servants money. Two invest the money and double their profit, and a third hides his in the ground. When the master returns, he declares the third “wicked and lazy” and a “worthless slave,” and casts him into the “outer darkness.” “To receive God’s bounty, you cannot hide your head in the sand,” Garay preaches. “You have to take a leap of faith.”

I asked Garay why his parishioner Billy Gonzales, who earns barely $25,000 and has no money to fix his car, should donate 10 percent of his income. “Because it gives him a new mentality. It teaches him that money can breed more money, that you can have money in your pocket on Saturday morning even though you got paid Friday night. People who support the church week after week have a dedication. Those who just give $5 or $10 here and there, you’ll hear them have the same problems week after week.” Jackson Lears would add another explanation: tithing is like the moment the gambler lays his money down on the table—it “promises at least a fleeting opportunity to contact a realm where hope is alive,” he writes. Without it, there’s only the dull regularity of $2,000 a month and a dead car.

During the boom years, Apostle Garay, as he is known in church, was brasher than he is now. He spoke in very specific terms during church services, promising that a $100 offering would yield a $10,000 return: “This is not my promise. It is God’s promise, and he will make it happen!” he would say.

While it sounds absurd, this kind of message can have a positive influence, according to Tony Tian-Ren Lin, a researcher at the University of Virginia who has made a close study of Latino prosperity gospel congregations over the years. These churches typically take in people who had “been basically dropped into the world from pretty primitive settings”—small towns in Latin America with no electricity or running water and very little educational opportunity. In their new congregation, their pastor slowly walks them through life in the U.S., both inside and outside of church, until they become more confident. “In Mexico, nobody ever told them they could do anything,” says Lin, who was himself raised in Argentina. He finds the message at prosperity churches to be quintessentially American. “They are taught they can do absolutely anything, and it’s God’s will. They become part of the elect, the chosen. They get swept up in the manifest destiny, this idea that God has lifted Americans above everyone else.”

At Casa del Padre, the celebration of consumer culture is quite visible, along with a sense of boundless opportunity. The people in the church, for instance, tend to have very expensive cell phones—never the free ones that come with a calling plan, nor the sort that can be bought cheaply at a convenience store. “They start wanting what’s considered the best and the most technologically advanced in this country,” Lin says. Garay’s church, it seems to me, teaches them that they deserve these things, so they go about getting them, with few resources and infinite adaptability. Before the crash, one group of young men got a $12,000 loan to start a landscaping company; another man bought a $270,000 house. One of the church’s Bible-study leaders, who’d grown up in a remote village in Mexico with an abusive, alcoholic father, had become a very successful contractor by the height of the boom, managing 30 men on multiple jobs and winning contracts to paint luxury subdivisions in the exurbs.

The tenets of the prosperity gospel, and the practical advice that pastors often give their parishioners, help immigrants learn “not just how to survive but how to thrive; not just live paycheck to paycheck but handle money—manage complicated payrolls, invest in equipment,” Lin told me. Along the way, they become assimilated. “While they’re trying to be closer to God, instead they become American,” he says, from their optimism and entrepreneurialism to the very nature of their dreams.

These days, Garay’s message is more subdued than it was at the height of the boom, but not substantially different. In a sermon on Father’s Day, he did not make specific claims of financial returns on investments but instead spoke vaguely about how his congregation’s prospects were “good and going to get better.” After church, I asked Garay about how the gospel was holding up in the recession. It was a hot summer day, and although he had just finished one of his feverish two-hour sermons, he seemed energized rather than drained. “Look,” he said, and rounded his hands as if to indicate a protective shield. “The recession has not hit my church.” He reminded me that when he had asked how many people were out of work, only four people out of about 100 there had raised their hands. But in a church where failure is seen as a kind of sin, it seems credulous at best to expect an honest response to that question. I later met at least one person—Billy Gonzales’s younger brother—who didn’t have a job but hadn’t raised his hand, because he thought he’d “have one lined up soon.”

Garay describes the recession as God’s judgment—for abortion, taking prayer out of school, bikinis on television, “Desperate Housewives, whatever.” But God is also giving us a two-year window to repent, he says. He calculates that we’ve had five years of extreme plenty and now the clock is running out, based on the biblical story of Joseph and the great famine—seven years of plenty followed by seven years of a failed harvest. If we don’t repent, we will experience “misery like we have never known it.” These days, if any parishioners or fellow pastors ask Garay for investment advice, he tells them to wait two years before making a move.

Like much of Garay’s advice, this recommendation is partly grounded in economic reality, and partly drawn from mystical notions about a biblical calendar. “I’m very real,” he once told me. “If you want to eat at Red Lobster, you better have a Red Lobster paycheck, and enough left over to pay your electric bill. But I’ve also seen miracles of God.” Later, during one of our talks over coffee, his wife echoed the sentiment. “If you can’t afford a house, you shouldn’t buy it,” Hazael said, when I asked whether the prosperity gospel might push people to take irresponsible risks. “But if the Lord is telling you to ‘take that first step and I will provide,’ then you have to believe.”

I asked Garay many times about a connection between the mortgage crisis and the gospel, but he does not really see one. From everything he says about his time as a loan officer, it seems he was involved in the kinds of subprime loans that led to so many foreclosures. He was hired in Countrywide’s emerging-markets division, which meant he was expected to target the growing Latino community in the area. Like Beth Jacobson, he had no previous experience, but was valued for his connections and hustle. He makes astute criticisms of the risky loans but, like many former loan officers, he does so with a curious sense of distance, as if he had been just a cog in the machine. Loans got “too easy,” he says. “Mortgages would be $1,500 a month, and that was all [the loan applicants] made in a month,” he recalls, “but they figured they would rent the basement.” He says sometimes he told people the loans were going to kill them, but they would plead, “Please help me, please. I want a house.” Because he was becoming an increasingly prominent pastor at the time, many people who came to see him assumed he was the president of the bank and could protect them, he recalls.

Garay says as far as he knows no one in his church defaulted. But at a bare minimum, some of his parishioners have run into intense financial difficulties, sometimes defaulting soon after leaving the congregation. The man who’d bought the $270,000 house threw a huge housewarming party and invited everyone from church. He gave a weepy testimony about the house God had given him, passing around the title for all to see. At the time, he was working as a handyman, putting up drywall, painting, roofing, and doing other odd jobs. Within three months he had three families living in the three-bedroom house, and he still could not keep up with the payments. After five months, he went into foreclosure and ducked out of the country. Tony Lin is careful—and of course correct—to say that neither immigrants nor Latinos caused the crash; adherents of every stripe exhibited the same sort of magical thinking about finances, as did millions of nonbelievers. Still, he recalls, “I wasn’t very surprised when the whole subprime-mortgage thing blew up. I’m sure a loan officer never said, ‘God wants you to have a house.’ But you’ve already been taught that. Now here comes the loan officer saying, ‘Sign here, and this house will be yours.’ It feels like a gift from God. It’s the perfect fuel for the crisis.”

The guys who’d started the landscaping company also fared badly. They had a pretty good spring and summer in 2007, their first year of operation, and then business started to fall off. In church they kept giving positive testimonies, bragging about their success. But by October, they’d begun selling off their equipment; eventually they lost the business and had to go into hiding. The most interesting part of the story is the epilogue. One of the partners in the group, whom I’ll call Luis, eventually moved to Richmond, and an acquaintance from Casa del Padre told me that he’d recently run into him there. Luis hadn’t been embittered by the experience; he blamed the disaster on the fact that he’d started working on Sundays instead of going to church. Luis asked the man to come visit with some of the parishioners of his new church, to confirm that he had once been a great success. As they talked, he seemed happy and positive. “He wasn’t angry that things didn’t work out. He wasn’t angry at God. He looked back at those days and thought, ‘I can still have everything. Look what God gave me. That was a time when I had it all.’”

By many measures, Billy Gonzales does not have it all. He lives with his wife and three children in a tiny apartment on the back side of a development at the edge of town, where people hang out on the stoop until all hours. He works 45 minutes away and his car has been broken down for three months, and he does not have any money to fix it. Every day at work he is faced with a vision of what he does not have. He works for a man who just built a $4 million house—one of four the man owns. Gonzales’s job is to make sure every wine glass, garden statue, and book is dusted and in its proper place. Yet when I talked to Gonzales he was like a child hearing the ice-cream truck, or a man newly in love. “I’m crazy! Just crazy,” he said, meaning crazy for the Lord, and giving little jumps out of his chair.

I visited Gonzales one evening after he’d had a long day at work; his brother had given him a ride home. Gonzales has a wide, earnest face that can look like a child’s or, if he is tired, like an old man’s. He sat in his favorite squeaky leather chair with his Bible in one hand and a soccer ball at his feet. The sofas in the tiny living room are actually backseats ripped out of cars, with cushions thrown on them. He got the cushions from a man he once shared a trailer with, and they turned out to be infested with cockroaches. As we talked, the roaches crawled across the floor or on the sofas. Gonzales apologized but did not pay them much attention.

He told me he feels pity for his employer. He assumes the man must have been close to God at one point, or at least his family must have been, “because the rich are closer to God.” But now the man has lost his way. He laughs when Gonzales talks to him about Jesus, and he wastes his money, buying $500 birdhouses and hiring Gonzales to clean them.

Gonzales was once lost too. He came from a big family in Guatemala so poor “that the poor people would call us poor.” For a while after he came to the U.S., he sent money home, but then like many of his friends he lost the rhythm of work. Instead, he was snorting cocaine and getting drunk four nights a week. “I hated Americans. I hated them,” he said, and I had trouble believing him, given his now-innocent, open demeanor. He says that back then, he spent most of his days fantasizing about killing his brother-in-law, whom he hated for no reason he can remember. His conversion came two years ago, in the form of a sudden vision like Garay’s. One night, in a drugged-out haze, he saw a polished, shimmery stone. He later realized it was a jewel, one of the many treasures in God’s vast storehouse, destined for him. Eventually he made his way to Garay, whom he now calls his father.

When I mentioned Gonzales to Garay, the pastor praised him as a model congregant. Indeed, by any standard Gonzales is an admirable man. He is 24, married, works hard, and limits his extracurricular activities to Bible study and soccer. It took me a few visits to realize that two of the three small children in the house are not his. He married a woman with two sons and takes care of them. They call him Papa and he reads to them at night and speaks to them gently, exactly the way he speaks to his own baby son. He has every reason to be frustrated with his circumstances, but I never once saw him express anything but delight. The gospel obviously grounds Gonzales in a very concrete way. But I can also see how, one day, it might send him floating into the air.

“I want to buy a house,” he confessed to me one evening this summer. It turned out his lease was almost up, and he needed to move in the fall. “Not a small one but a really huge one, a nice one. With six bedrooms and a kitchen and living room. I know, it’s crazy! But nothing is impossible! God, you saved my life,” he said, no longer speaking to me. “You saved my life, and now you will give me a gift. Now I’m crazy!” Last I heard, he and Garay were house-hunting together.

A year or so after the crash, there are signs of a new sobriety—higher savings rates, for example, and a reduction in conspicuous spending. But it’s hard to imagine Americans reverting to frugality the way, say, the Japanese did during the “lost decade” after their economy crashed. If by stereotype the Japanese are savers, then Americans are consumers, and ever hopeful. Already, countless “entrepreneurs” are finding a silver lining in the mortgage crisis, buying up foreclosed lots—often sight unseen, based on Web listings alone—in desolate parts of Cleveland and Phoenix and other places where abandoned houses can sometimes be had for a few thousand dollars or less. The buyers pay these bargain-basement prices eagerly, in the belief that the houses must be great deals, when they are just as likely to be overtaken by mold, or have every one of their doors and windows missing and the roof caving in. In America there is always a next play, another opportunity, an “unearned blessing” that can make up for a lifetime of disappointment.

It is not all that surprising that the prosperity gospel persists despite its obvious failure to pay off. Much of popular religion these days is characterized by a vast gap between aspirations and reality. Few of Sarah Palin’s religious compatriots were shocked by her messy family life, because they’ve grown used to the paradoxes; some of the most socially conservative evangelical churches also have extremely high rates of teenage pregnancies, out-of-wedlock births, and divorce. As Garay likes to say, “What you have is nothing compared to what you will have.” The unpleasant reality—an inadequate paycheck, a pregnant daughter, a recession—is invisible. It’s your ability to see beyond such things, your willing blindness to even the most hopeless-seeming circumstances, that makes you a certain kind of modern Christian, and a 21st-century American.

There is the kind of hope that President Obama talks about, and that Clinton did before him—steady, uplifting, assured. And there is Garay’s kind of hope, which perhaps for many people better reflects the reality of their lives. Garay’s is a faith that, for all its seeming confidence, hints at desperation, at circumstances gone so far wrong that they can only be made right by a sudden, unexpected jackpot.

Once, I asked Garay how you would know for certain if God had told you to buy a house, and he answered like a roulette dealer. “Ten Christians will say that God told them to buy a house. In nine of the cases, it will go bad. The 10th one is the real Christian.” And the other nine? “For them, there’s always another house.”

source: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200912/rosin-prosperity-gospel

Consumerism and Prosperity Gospel

One of the greatest sources of evil in our world is the combination of Consumerism and the Prosperity Gospel of Evangelical Protestantism.

Health Care Reform and That Socialist Frank Capra: Mr. Smith Won't Shut Up

Watching "It's a Wonderful Life" has been a Christmas tradition since the 1970s. Hard to believe that today's beloved classic was a flop when it premiered in 1946.
It was even reported to the FBI as Communist propaganda. Ironic, since director Frank Capra said he made the movie to "combat a modern trend toward atheism."


But it's another Frank Capra film starring Jimmy Stewart that comes to mind now, with all the talk of health care reform and potential filibusters, followed by the Senate vote on Christmas Eve.

The HR 3590 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as it's known in the Senate, contains 2074 pages and clocks in at a shade over 20 pounds.

The bill is posted online, but when a document the size of a bread box gets introduced and passed in a matter of weeks, one has to wonder how many Senators actually read the bill.

In one memorable scene of Capra's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," junior senator (and unwitting pawn in a graft scheme) Jefferson Smith suggests that maybe he should read the bills before voting on them.

"The bills?" says an incredulous Senator Paine, played by Claude Rains. "These bills are put together by legal minds after long study. I can't understand half of them myself, and I used to be a lawyer."

Forget it, he tells Smith. "When the time comes, I'll advise you how to vote."



Yes, it might be a good idea to "read the bill" if the health care law is as revolutionary as they say it is.

Or, we could just go by what the experts tell us. On Christmas Day, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman weighed in with a Christmas parable:

Indulge me while I tell you a story – a near-future version of Charles Dickens's "A Christmas Carol." It begins with sad news: Young Timothy Cratchit, a.k.a. Tiny Tim, is sick. And his treatment will cost far more than his parents can pay out of pocket. Fortunately, our story is set in 2014, and the Cratchits have health insurance.

Some of Krugman's readers weren't buying it. Like this one.

Unfortunately, it's not 2014, it's 2010. And it would probably be great if Tiny Tim could hold out for another four years. But if we are going to be true to he story, Tiny Tim will be gone for two or three years before he is covered.

Good point. And here's another.

Apart from the technical problem of senate rules that has patently paralyzed our decision-making, the egregious, shameless imprint of corporate interests -- Eisenhower, if he were to deliver his farewell today, would have most certainly cited the medical-industrial complex -- has so thoroughly perverted our democracy that it is no longer recognizable as such. We have, without even realizing it, embraced a form of feudalism where the castles whose gates are emblazoned with names like Pfizer, Medtronic and Aetna, the moats are fluffy piles of money, and the knights in shining suits their lawyers and lobbyists.

The most significant reply to Krugman, brought to the top of the heap by recommendations of fellow readers, was this one.

Above all, please call on Harry Reid to pass the public option by a simple majority vote using reconciliation. The whole reform bill cannot be passed using reconciliation, but the public option can be passed that way separately. Unless Reid stops pretending that he needs 60 votes to pass the public option, he should be removed as majority leader. According to several reports, Rahm Emanuel went to Reid's office and put very strong WH pressure on him not to try to twist Liebermans's arm or otherwise seriously try to get him to change his vote. Emanuel virtually forced Reid to cave in to Lieberman without a fight, and now the president and Reid are trying to float the false narrative that 60 votes are needed to pass the public option.

I'm no procedural expert, but Politics Daily's Jill Lawrence wrote about the reconciliation scenario months ago.

I thought former senator George S. McGovern had lost his mind when, back in September, he suggested that we just make Medicare universal.

What seems missing in the current battle is a single proposal that everyone can understand and that does not lend itself to demagoguery. If we want comprehensive health care for all our citizens, we can achieve it with a single sentence: Congress hereby extends Medicare to all Americans.

Oh really, I thought. Maybe I'll ask Congress to make world peace while they're at it.

Today, in light of the devolving health care debate, McGovern looks like a genius.

In "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," Smith had to rely on the "Boy Rangers" back home to get the truth out. The Washington press corps, according to the film, was made up of cynics, hacks and shills. Not surprisingly, when the film opened in 1939, the press hated it.

So did politicians. Alben W. Barkley, the Senate Majority Leader, called the film "silly and stupid," and said it "makes the Senate look like a bunch of crooks." Just like "It's a Wonderful Life,'' the film was labeled anti-American and pro-Communist. One journalist thought Washington should pass a law empowering theater owners to boycott films that "were not in the best interest of our country."

Touchy bunch, weren't they?

HR 3590's proponents say (quoting Voltaire): Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. We can always fix the law later, like we did with Social Security and Medicare.

But there's one flaw in that argument. When was Social Security ever anything but a government program? When was Medicare ever without a public option? The law of 1965 created a public option.

You could argue that's the whole reason for government programs anyway. Government steps in when private industry turns away, and it's easy to see why private companies would not be falling all over each other in the stampede to offer health insurance to sick, elderly people of limited means.

We don't have a Jimmy Stewart or a Jean Arthur leading the charge. But we still have a country. We still have a Constitution. And thanks to the Internet, we have thousands of Boy Rangers who refuse to shut up.

"You think I'm licked. You all think I'm licked. Well, I'm not licked. And I'm going to stay right here and fight for this lost cause."

Mr. Smith, you took the words right out of their mouths.

source: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/12/26/health-care-reform-and-that-socialist-frank-capra-mr-smith-won/

Why Would Any Non-Psychopath Dance on Deborah Howell's Grave?

Among the many things I do not understand – the appeal of the Coen brothers*, for instance, and the whole adventure known as mathematics – the impulse to append a "Woohoo, you're dead!" comment to an online obituary looms large today. Why? Well, since you ask, on Saturday we ran a story about the death of Deborah Howell, a retired newspaperwoman who had a great career and was killed in a traffic accident in New Zealand, where she was on a long-planned vacation with her husband.

Last night, I wandered into our comment section, as I often do, to get a sense of who is reading and what they are thinking. Bad move, though, because anger is contagious, and what I found in those comments, in response to Carl Cannon's nicely-done appreciation of Howell, made me want to spit. There were some lovely tributes, both from folks who had known her and others who had not, but had still been moved to send her family condolences – you know, the way feeling people do.

But there was also a shocking number of comments to the effect that since Howell was in the news business, she must have been a lefty, so how fabulous she'd been killed. There was joshing speculation about whether she'd been driving a hybrid, a joke about how liberals walking in lockstep really ought to be more careful, and a couple of cracks about how Republicans were sure to be blamed. "One less of those anti-US types to deal with," said one of several celebratory rejoinders from readers who by their own account had five minutes earlier never even heard of Deborah Howell.

We can't pretend this sort of thing is limited to one or other corner, either; Matt Lewis wrote here about how news of Rush Limbaugh's chest pains had similarly gladdened some tiny liberal hearts, and our obit of Irving Kristol provoked disquieting comments, too.

So, what to make of this? Assuming we are not becoming a nation of psychopaths, are we trading our humanity for a little negative attention? Do people just not think before they type? Or, even if they don't really mean such meanness, do they not worry that someone who reads it might?

Part of the problem, I think, is the way in which outrageous and hateful speech is rewarded here and now: Ann Coulter outdoes herself yet again? Well give that woman a book contract – and can we get her on the "Today" show? Or there's comedian Wanda Sykes, invited to sit by the president and first lady at the White House Correspondent's Association dinner, joking about hoping Limbaugh's kidneys fail.

The relatively small differences between Republicans and Democrats – infinitesimal compared to the differences between political parties in other countries – are not only exaggerated but made to seem catastrophic, mostly because demonizing the political other is good for business if you're a political performance artist or a fund-raiser. Because unless the other side is characterized as a threat to life as we know it, who's gonna pony up?

Howell herself wrote about just the kind of irrational and destructive political rage I'm talking about. As ombudsman for the Washington Post in '06, she erroneously wrote that convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff had donated to both political parties instead of only to Republicans. It was an honest mistake, but readers assumed she could only have written such a thing in the service of conservative ideology:

"Nothing in my 50-year career prepared me for the thousands of flaming e-mails I got last week over my last column,'' she wrote in response, "e-mails so abusive and many so obscene that part of The Post's Web site was shut down. . . . I have a tough hide and a few curse words (which I use frequently) are not going to hurt my feelings. But it is profoundly distressing if political discourse has sunk to a level where abusive name-calling and the crudest of sexual language are the norm, where facts have no place in an argument. This unbounded, unreasoning rage is not going to help this newspaper, this country or democracy.''

Amen, sister. To readers who think it is their God-given right to throw rocks on our site, under the cowardly cover of anonymity, think again; this is a business, and some modicum of civility is our version of "no shirt, no shoes, no service.'' It is also something more, and in our imperfect way, we are trying our best to give all sides their fair shake, and to make this one place where those who might not agree on the issues can at least, we hope, agree not to wish one another harm. And to those who are constantly threatening to take their clicks and go elsewhere when their more pungent, "Pls. die soon" comments are deleted, I say: Promises, promises. This is really not the site for you.

source: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/01/04/why-would-any-non-psychopath-want-to-dance-on-deborah-howells-g/

Cruelty In Obituary Comments Shocks Editor

Read Melinda Henneberger's Politics Daily Piece, "Why Would Any Non-Psychopath Dance On Deborah Howell's Grave?"

text sizeAAA
January 4, 2010

A long-time journalist was killed in an accident, and in the comments on her obituary, a small but vocal minority cheered. Melinda Henneberger, editor-in-chief of Politics Daily, wonders whether we are trading our humanity for a little negative attention.

source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122221208