“…AS THYSELF”

“…AS THYSELF”

Thursday, March 03, 2011
By Rev. Dr. Larry Delano Coleman


"And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? 29And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 31And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. 32And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: 33And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. 34And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question."

Mark 12:28-43

“…As thyself,” Mark 12: 31, is an ancient and immanent measuring principle continually governing and animating human dynamics and human interactions.

We look outwardly and assess inwardly. We look inwardly and assess outwardly.

“The self” looks to itself, continually. Its measuring rod, its plumb line, is itself, its consciousness of itself. Its only impulse is to itself: to know itself, to preserve itself, to nourish itself, and to reproduce itself.

Whether the self’s human bearer, its “vessel,” Isa. 29:16, will or can perform any of these functions, for the benefit of its physical person, or not, its immanent, inner self must continually impel it to do so, in ever greater degrees of intensity. It cannot help itself. It must do this for itself, so long as there is life in itself. It is that “still small voice” 1 Kings 19:12, which I know as “the God-self.”

One’s personal “God-self,” though, is neither exclusive, nor discrete, of others’ God selves, appearances to the contrary notwithstanding. “You are not your own,” is literally correct, as the Apostle Paul taught centuries ago. “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own.” 1 Cor.6:19. As such, you are never, ever alone, but are a vital part of God’s infinitely interlocking network of connectivity which continuously renews itself. “For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone.” Rom. 14:7.

Like amino acids in a protein molecule, we bind and cling together to perpetuate our own survival by promoting our own protein’s potency. What is true for protein molecules is also true for couples, families, tribes, creeds, and nations. Such combinations empower and extend “thyself” exponentially far beyond the physical capacity of the singular self, even though the self at all times retains its own capability, its own autonomy, and its own “God-self” impulse, which particularly includes “assembling together.” Heb. 10:25.

What we call “The Self” is our portion of The Holy Spirit. It is what I have termed “the God-self,” in my 1985 essay in THE NILE REVIEW newsletter, “Exhalations from My Soul,” which was self-published and is now extremely rare.

Jesus Christ taught “Love thy neighbor as thyself”. Mark 12:31, Matthew 22:39. The root of all things is “thyself.” Without “thyself,” nothing else exists. Thus, everything else must be perceived as an extension of this primal dimension, thyself.
Jesus was restating a much older pre- Old Testament value, when he said “love thy neighbor as thyself”:

Leviticus 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

Leviticus 19:34 But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

These irresistible “God-self” tendencies even caused Jesus the Christ to cry out in the Garden of Gethsemene “Father take away this cup from me!” Mark 14:36, Luke 22:42. And it also caused him to cry out on Mount Calvary’s cross, “My God! My God why have you forsaken me!” Matthew 27:45-46; Mark 15:16-39.

The point is clear. If even the God-self in Jesus Christ must cry out for succor to God, so also must we, in the midst of adversity. No one’s God-self is exempt. Let no one diminish “thyself.” Part of you is divine; that portion known as the “God-self.”

6 I have said, Ye are gods; Joh. 10.34
and all of you are children of the Most High.


7 But ye shall die like men,
and fall like one of the princes


Psalm 82:6-7.

Some may be annoyed by this emphasis on the self, and of the attribution of divinity to the self. Such was certainly the case in the days of Jesus among his own people, the Jews:
30 I and my Father are one.
31 ¶ Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I showed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; Lev. 24.16 and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods Ps. 82.6 ?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken;
36 say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works; that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
39 ¶ Therefore they sought again to take him; but he escaped out of their hand,
40 and went away again beyond Jordan into the place where John at first baptized; Joh. 1.28 and there he abode.
41 And many resorted unto him and said, John did no miracle: but all things that John spake of this man were true.
42 And many believed on him there.

John 10:30-42

The world, continually, would have you believe that you and I are “man.” The truth is you, and I, are gods. Jesus came to teach us who we were and to demonstrate to us our true power and our true identity by his birth, life, death and resurrection!
Do not be conformed to this world, but continually be transformed by the renewing of your minds so that you may be able to determine what God's will is-what is proper, pleasing, and perfect. Rom.12:2

These “God-self” impulses may be transmuted by divine love to look beyond itself into: “this love that surpasses knowledge--that you may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.” Ephesians 3:19. At this point, the self is relinquished, surrendered, subtracted, leaving only “God.” The “self” is extinguished, only for some higher, greater mission or duty which is anchored and tethered in a love and “peace that passes all understanding.” Phil.4:7. It is succored in divinity, itself: “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” John 15:13.

This is the ultimate consummation of the “royal law” described in James 2:8. Thus, in the end, Jesus Christ was able to say “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.” Luke 23:34. An abject request by one whose love overcame the world.

1984 AMICUS BRIEF filed in Kansas City's Desegregation case: JENKINS V. STATE OF MISSOURI, NO. 77 0420 CV W 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
WESTERN DIVISION

Kalima Jenkins, et al. plaintiff|
v.
State of Missouri, et al. defendants |
|
| Civil Action
no. 77 0420 CV W 4

BRIEF OF THE KANSAS CITY CITIZENS FOR
QUALITY EDUCATION, RESPECTING REMEDY
AMICUS CURIAE

Come now The Kansas City Citizens for Quality Education, as amici, and proffer to the court herewith their brief respecting a remedy for disestablishing the vestiges of the dual system of state imposed segregation found to be extant in the Kansas City, Missouri School District (KCMSD) is the Court Order of September 17, 1984.

I. SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF BRIEF, AMICUS CURIAE

This brief is narrowly tailored to focus attention upon, and to offer a remedy for, what amici perceive to be the real problem underlying the unequal education being accorded black students in the Kansas City, Missouri public schools. The real problem is that the content of the textbooks, character of the curriculum, and the attitudes and training of teachers and administrators are woefully deficient, and, when combined, constitute an extremely efficient manufacturer of black inferiority complexes. These inferiority complexes, in turn, breed despair, lethargy, futility, bitterness, and self hate, which, also in turn, adversely affect the lives and progeny of these black students; their communities; and the nation at large. See Jenkins v. State of Missouri, 593 F. Supp. 1485, 1492 (WD, MO 1984).

None of this is new. Fifty years ago, Dr. Carter G. Woodson, the founder of the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History, and the founder of "Negro History Week," published his classic: The Mis Education of the Negro (AMS Press, 1977), which has subsequently been reprinted. Throughout the length and breath of this brief, resort to this book and others will be made to substantiate and explicate the contentions of amici.

Hear now the words of Dr. Woodson:


As another has well said, to handicap a student by teaching him that his black face is a curse and that his struggle to change his condition is hopeless is the worst sort of lynching. It kills one's aspirations and dooms him to vagabondage and crime. It is strange, then, that the friends of truth and the promoters of freedom have not risen up against the present propaganda in the schools and crushed it. This crusade is much more important than the anti lynching movement, because there would be no lynching if it did not start in the schoolroom. Why not exploit, enclave, or exterminate a class that everybody is taught to regard as inferior! Id., p.3.

In fact, the content of this nation's textbooks and curricula, as well as the pedagogical perspectives and practices of its educational personnel—and this locality's—are indissolubly connected with the racist notion of white superiority and black inferiority. The words of Woodson are again edifying:

The "educated Negroes" have the attitude of contempt toward their own people because in their own as well as in their mixed schools Negroes are taught to admire the Hebrew, the Greek, the Latin and the Teuton and to despise the African. id. p. 1....

The thought of the inferiority of the Negro is drilled into him in almost every class he enters and in almost every book he studies. If he happens to leave school after he masters the fundamentals, before he finishes high school or reaches college, he will naturally escape some of this bias and may recover in time to be of service to his people.

Practically all of the successful Negroes in this country are of the uneducated type or of that of Negroes who have had no formal education at all. The large majority of the Negroes who have put on the finishing touches of our best colleges are all but worthless in the development of their people. If after leaving school they have the opportunity to give out to Negroes what traducers of the race would like to have it learn such persons may thereby earn a living at teaching or preaching what they have been taught but they never become a constructive force in the development of the race. The so called school, then, becomes a questionable factor in the life of this despised people. Id. pp.2–3.

No less an authority than Chief Justice Taney, author of that infamous exegesis on the origins and import of American constitutional racism, Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857), sheds light on the plight of the African in America. He states:

The words "people of the United Sates" and "citizens" are synonymous terms, and mean the same thing....The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea of abatement (African descendants) compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them. Id. pp. 404–5.


Generations of black and white teachers, administrators, policy makers, business persons—in short, everyone educated in America—grew up under a system in which the racist notion, above referenced, was the central, unalterable premise. Indeed, so deeply, in the view of amici, is this concept embedded that its validity is implicitly accepted as a matter of course, and this implicit acceptance, now, subconsciously and automatically influences persons—both black and white—in their day to day approaches to education, conceptually, pedagogically administratively, and fiscally.

Some may marvel at, or object to the contention of amici that both black and white educational personnel are equally impaired, hence ill equipped to properly educate black youth. Therefore, the following is submitted. In a book entitled Behavior Modification in Black Populations: Psychological Issues and Empirical Findings (Plenum Press, 1982), Samuel M. Turner & Russell T. Jones, Editors, Dr. Lloyd Bond states in "The I.Q. Controversy and Academic Performance":

There is ample evidence...that teachers, both black and white, have generally negative attitudes toward minority children. Such children are viewed by their teachers as less able and generally uneducable. Id. p. 115.

Recently, that is, within the last three or four decades, considerable research on race of teacher as a factor influencing the academic performance of black students has been undertaken...The general pattern which emerges from these studies is that teacher race, per se, does not directly affect student performance. The conclusion is consistent with other findings mentioned earlier which suggest that black and white teachers do not differ significantly in their orientation toward black students. Id. p. 116.

As a consequence of this deeply embedded notion of white superiority/black inferiority, textbooks, reference books, and other books produced by major educational publishers are distinguished by their omissions, distortions, half truths, and, sometimes, outright lies about the African contribution to any aspect of American or world civilization, including but not limited to: the scientific, historical, aesthetic, mechanical, philosophical, theological, mathematical, economic, medical or political.

These "intellectual torts" committed against persons of African descent are both intentional and unintentional. They are intentional in that, to make a profit, these book publishers must—to use a colloquialism—"give the people what the want"; that is, they must give them what they have been behaviorally modified to want and accept: Information validating the notion of white superiority/black inferiority. Otherwise, their books are likely to be burned, banned, or barred by a brainwashed, irate citizenry; or by the equally brainwashed, irate educational personnel.

These intellectual torts are unintentional in that authors, researchers, and editors, themselves victims of the racist notion, above referenced, are oblivious to any breach of intellectual honesty; blind to, and incapable of assimilating any, countervailing information; and ignorant of the truth.


This racist notion, in fact, infects every aspect of American life, to greater and lesser degrees, and all Americans. Given this notion, black civil rights "leaders," themselves infected, hold that the only solution to the problem in education is forced integration, forced busing, and massive consolidation. These "leaders" do not believe that anything which is all black or predominantly black—not by law, but simply in fact—is equal to anything that is all white or predominantly white, even if all other things are equal. This is because they have been "mis educated," according to Dr. Woodson, who states:

With "mis educated Negroes" in control themselves, however, it is doubtful that the system would be very much different from what it is or that it would rapidly undergo change. The Negroes thus placed in charge would be the products of the same system and would show no more conception of the task at hand than do the whites now exploiting Negro institutions as educators, but the former have no more vision than their competitors. Taught from books of the same bias, trained by Caucasians of the same prejudices or by Negroes of enslaved minds, one generation of Negro teachers after another have served no higher purpose than to do what they are told to do. In other works, a Negro teacher instructing Negro children is in many respects a white teacher thus engaged, for the program in each case is about the same....The present system under the control of the whites trains the Negro to be white and at the same time convinces him of the impropriety or the impossibility of his becoming white. Mis Education, p. 23.

To frontally assault "mis educated Negroes," history has shown, is not without its perils, however, for this class of persons constitutes the pool from which civil rights "leaders" are drawn. Nevertheless he continues:

This is slightly dangerous ground here, however, for the Negro's mind has been all but perfectly enslaved in that he has been trained to think what is desired of him. The "highly educated" Negroes do not like to hear anything uttered against this procedure because they make their living in this way, and they feel that they must defend the system. Few mis educated Negroes ever act otherwise; and, if they so express themselves, they are easily crushed by the large majority to the contrary so that the procession may move on without interruption.

The result, then, is that the Negroes thus mis educated are of no service to themselves and none to the white man. The white man does not need the Negroes' professional, commercial or industrial assistance; and as a result of the multiplication of mechanical appliances he no longer needs them in drudgery or menial service. The "highly educated" Negroes, moreover, do not deed the Negro professional or commercial classes because Negroes have been taught that whites can serve them more efficiently in these spheres. Reduced, then, to teaching and preaching, the Negroes will have no outlet but to go down a blind alley, if the sort of education which they are now receiving is to enable them to find the way out of their present difficulties. Mis Education, p. 24–5.

The mental aberrations attributed to "mis education" by Woodson to blacks are, interestingly, shared by a significant number of white "liberals," and for the same reason: whites are superior; blacks are inferior, and the only way to solve the problem in education is by compulsory integration, whatever the consequences.

Amici believe neither in the inherent superiority of white people, nor the inherent inferiority of black people. Amici believe only in desegregation; that is, the removal of laws and practices which deny or qualify liberty, due process and equal protection. Amici do not believe in compulsory integration, deeming it to be wasteful, harmful and racist.


Thus, amici fully applaud this Court's decision of September 17, 1984, both its letter and spirit. However, amici must point out that a fully "integrated" school district can still have critical lingering vestiges of racial segregation where the conditions of education: textbooks, curricula, and educational personnel, retain their roots (cause) and continue to yield their “segregative” fruit (effects). Texts, curricula, and educational personnel are the keys. Integration, per se, is irrelevant.

II. THE REMEDY

A. THE ISSUE

WHAT COST EFFECTIVE REMEDY(IES) CAN BEST ACCORD QUALITY EDUCATION TO BLACK STUDENTS IN THE KCMSD, GIVEN SAID DISTRICT'S VESTIGIAL LEGACY AND PRACTICE OF FURNISHING INFERIOR EDUCATION TO SAID STUDENTS, WHERE THE COURT ORDER REQUIRES AN INTRADISTRICT REMEDY; THE KCMSD IS 67.7% BLACK; AND THE COURT ORDER ENCOURAGES, WHERE POSSIBLE, A NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOL POLICY, CONSONANT WITH THE 14th AMENDMENT?

B. OVERVIEW OF PREVAILING LAW

Since the Supreme Court's epochal ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) (Brown I), which specifically struck down the alleged and illusory "separate but equal" doctrine enunciated in Plessy v. Ferguson. 163 U.S. 537 (1896), federal courts have strained to fashion a remedy which would have the effect of reducing, to within constitutionally permissible limits, that "... feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community..." which stunted and distorted "the hearts and minds" of generations of black students "... in a way unlikely ever to be undone." Brown I, supra, at 494.

At best, all that can be said is that the struggle continues, as evinced by the instant litigation.

Many lawyers have earned substantial legal fees; many bus companies have earned significant profits; many so called "experts" have been in receipt of copious retainer fees, but the problem and the challenge of eradicating, "root and branch," Green v. County School Board of New Kent County, et al, 391 U.S. 430, 438 (1968), those vestiges of segregation which have corrupted the "hearts and minds" of generations of black students remains unremedied.

Indeed, while it may be true that many of the branches of de jure segregation (unequal facilities, race specific school etc.) have been lopped off, the insidious root of that tree (the myth of white superiority/black inferiority) remains intact.

Fortunately, as this Court has previously and correctly noted:


Since these defendants have failed to comply with their constitutional obligations, this Court not only has the power but the duty to enter a decree which will correct the continuing effects of past discrimination as well as bar discrimination against blacks in the future. Louisiana v. United States, 380 U.S. 145 85 S.Ct. 817,13 L.Ed.2d 709 (1965).
Jenkins v. State of Missouri, supra, at 1505.

For a long while after Brown II, 349 U.S. 294 (1955), it was popularly supposed that the only means of rectifying the constitutional wrongs imposed or permitted by state law was to "integrate" the school administrative and student populations. Green v. County School Board, supra; Swann v. Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971); Keyes vs. School District No1, Denver, Colo., 413 U.S. 189 (1973); and Liddell v. State of Missouri, 731 F2d 1294 (8th Cir. 1984) and the cases cited therein.

What precisely "integration" is, however, in contradistinction to "desegration" has not been clearly defined. Thus, the terms have been used loosely and often interchangeably to refer to a situation in which black and/or white students are transported to each other, mandatorily, so that by proximity to white students, those deprived black students can be made whole.

C. AMICI'S VIEW OF DESEGREGATION V. INTEGRATION

It is respectfully submitted, however, that such a practice (compulsory integration), though doubtless well intended, is counter productive, and probably harmful to black and white students, for such a practice confirms in the "hearts and minds" of black students that "feeling of inferiority" referenced in Brown I, supra. For, if they were not inferior, why are they incapable of being educated other than in immediate proximity to whites? And, such a practice inculcates a "seige" type mentality in white students, which precipitates white flight away from the incoming blacks, who, it is supposed, must be inferior if they are incapable of being educated other than in immediate proximity to whites, miles away from their communities. See, e.g. Keyes, supra, 413 U.S. at 250. No rational person seeks or enjoys the company of inferior persons. In short, "integration" accepts and assumes the racist notion of white superiority/black inferiority.

For the purposes of clarity, therefore, amici offer the following definitions:

1. Segregation—The maintenance of laws and practices which deny or qualify the liberty, due process and equal protection rights of individuals, guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. See, e.g., Brown I, 347 U.S. at 494.
2. Desegregation—The removal of laws and practices which deny or qualify the liberty, due process, and equal protection rights of individuals, guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. See. e.g., Swann v. Board of Education, supra, 402 U.S. at 17.
3. Freedom of Choice --The right of the individual to chose, unencumbered by laws, the manner in which he shall exercise the rights guaranteed to him by the U.S. Counstitution. See. e.g., Green v. County School Board, supra, 391 U.S. at 439–440.
4. Integration—The absence of the right of the individual to choose, unencumbered by laws, the manner in which he shall exercise the rights guaranteed to him by the U.S. Counstitution. See, e.g., Keyes v. School District No. 1, supra, 413 U.S. at 225–6.


It will be observed that desegregation and freedom of choice vest the individual with freedom; whereas, integration and segregation divest the individual of freedom. Hence, integration and segregation are inimical to the exercise of individual freedom, while desegregation and freedom of choice are conducive to the exercise of individual freedom. Since freedom is a personal right, Missouri ex.rel. Gaines v. Canada, 305 U.S. 337, 351 (1938); Sweatt. v. Painter, 339 U.S. 635 (1950), legal proscriptions of that "personal right" should be stricken as constitutionally infirm.

Amici respectfully submit that the only way to eradicate that inferiority that pervades the black community is to tackle it at its source: in the curricula, textbooks, and educational personnel. The minds of generations of blacks have been deliberately distorted, warped, and destroyed by the incessant forced ingestion of misinformation, lies, half truths, and blatant omissions respecting the contributions of blacks to world and American civilization in every field of study in this nation's public and private schools. It is here that amici drop anchor. For, it is here that the real problem lies.

The National Alliance of Black School Educators, Inc.'s Task Force on Black Academic and Cultural Excellence issued a seminal report in November 1984 entitled “Saving the African American Child.” This vitally compelling report is annexed to this brief to facilitate the court's review. (Webmaster's note: A link is provided to NABSE for those interested in requesting a copy of this report.)

That report's ethos is stated as follows:

"Excellence" in education is much more than a matter of high test scores on standardized minimum or advanced competency knowledge and to develop the rational reflective and critical capacities of our children. We have every right to expect that, upon completion of public school work, our children will have the general skills to enter the world of work and to be fully functional members of the society. But more than this, we want the content of education to be true, appropriate, and relevant. We want the educational processes to be democratic and humane. We want the aim of educational processes to be the complete development of the person and not merely preparation for the available low level jobs, or even for high level jobs, that may serve no purpose beyond individual enhancement.

Among other things, excellence in education must prepare a student for self knowledge and to become a contributing problem solving member of his or her own community and in the wider world as well. No child can be ignorant of or lack respect for his or her own unique cultural group and meet others in the world on an equal footing. We believe that this type of excellence in education is a right of the masses and is not merely for a small elite.
Id., p. 15.

That report, moreover, also corroborates amici's view respecting the dire importance of focusing attention upon the contributions of Africans to American and world civilization in the curricula of our nation's schools:


African American's Deep Historical Respect for Education. The world's first recorded tradition of higher education was in Africa.12 Throughout African history from ancient "prehistoric" times to ancient KMT (Egypt) and throughout the continent education was an instrument of survival and enrichment.13,14 Contrary to some popular belief, it was not only the Ancient Nile Valley cultures of Africa that exemplified educational excellence, Africa.15–18 but also a continent wide African culture as a whole which placed the highest value on a democratic comprehensive education system.

Destruction of African and African American Social Institutions. Slavery in America, like colonization in Africa, depended upon the destruction of all the ancient highly developed African social institutions in Africa and in its diaspora among the enslaved African Americans. This was especially true for the educational institutions.19–24 Later, to justify brutal treatment of slaves, history would be rewritten to say that our institutions never existed or that they were never developed to any sophisticated level. Slaves were denied the right to develop independent educational institutions. But special "schooling" for slaves was provided. It was a special schooling, training, or "miseducation" that was designed to keep African Americans in a subservient position. 25–28

With brutal honesty, that report continues:

A culturally salient and sensitive education is a frontal attack on the cumulative effects which prolonged and persistent racism has had on American society. The study of the history and culture of African Americans as reflected in schools, especially in textbooks in all academic subjects, has historically been more neglected and less influenced by quality historical scholarship than any other topic. To a very large degree, the negative attitudes and reactions which many European Americans have toward African Americans are shaped by the sins of omission and commission that are operative in public education's treatment of African and African American history and culture. H. Jesse Arnelle notes:

We no longer can tolerate a school system which while educating the black child about the contribution of the white man in America, observes minimally and derisively the black man's contribution in every field of endeavor, and fails, therefore, to educate the white and black child in any meaningful way.44

Among other things, culture serves certain vital psychological and social functions. It is the material and the source of a group identity. It is the material and the source of a group identity. It is group identity which serves as the basis for group unity, a unity which enables a group to mobilize its resources in support of itself. The suppression, destruction, distortion of a group's history and culture by others, and the surrender of one's own natal cultural forms serves to produce pathology within groups and within individuals.45–50 African American children must be given the opportunity to experience an appropriate cultural education which gives them an intimate knowledge of, and which honors and respects, the history and culture of our people.

Academic excellence cannot be reached without cultural excellence. We expect African Americans to meet academic standards of excellence. We also know that African American history and culture will be unavoidable if truth and quality are in public schools, not as an appendage to subjects but as an integral part.
Id., pp. 23–24.


D. THE PREMISES OF AMICI
In light of the foregoing, amici submit, respectfully, the following premises:

1. Education should not be incidental to integration; rather, integration should be incidental to education. Quality education is paramount, and it should take precedence over tangential societal aims.
2. Quality education will more sooner actualize tangential societal aims than the current program which pursues those aims, first, at the expense of quality education. Under the latter postulate, both quality education and societal aims suffer. Under the former, both aims are realized.
3. Quality education is the process and the end product of that process of imparting information, knowledge, values, and discernment, which best enables a particular person, or class of persons to realize his or their highest potential.
4. An essential precondition for the rendition, or receipt of quality education is an environment and pedagogical materials which enable a person or a class of persons to feel good about themselves, their past, and their potential. Such an environment and such materials promote an open heart, an eager and inquiring mind, and a willing hand. The absence of such an environment and such materials promotes a closed heart, a dull and malevolent mind, and an idle hand. Thus, the proper environment and pedagogical materials are inseparable from the rendition or receipt of quality education.
5. Quality education should take precedence over racial diversity in the formulation of a desegregation order, and the remedies therein.
6. No student should be traumatized or stigmatized by racially biased curricula, textbooks, or teachers.

The foregoing premises are cost effective in that when contrasted with the costs, consequences, and scholastic outcomes of mandatory transportation, for integration, the costs, consequences, and scholastic outcomes of curricula revision, text revision, and teacher re education, will be found to be not only less expensive, but also socially and scholastically superior. Keyes, supra, 413 U.S. at 242. In other words, attacking the "real problem" is more cost effective and less expensive than ignoring the "real problem," because ignoring the real problem means wasting millions with neglible, or even negative results; while attacking the real problem will yield profits to the city, the school district, the state, and the students, of a magnitude too great to measure. Attacking the real problem, in short, solves the problem.

In this wise, it may be useful to consider the findings of the NABSE's report, Saving the African American Child:


Inherent in racial balance remedies that give priority to the placement of African American students in a perpetual minority relationship with European American students are the false assumptions that African American children inevitably suffer intellectually when their education occurs mainly in African American schools and that the motivation and achievement of African American children necessarily improves when they are enrolled in majority white schools. The racial composition of a school, when considered alone, does not necessarily have a substantial positive effect on academic performance of African American children. Significant evidence does not exist to support any claim that racial mixing alone has contributed to the excellence in the academic growth of the masses of African American students.54 It is not simply the addition of African American children to a previously all white school that makes a positive difference; it is the elimination of many of the negative factors within the school and the teaching and learning process, African American or European American, that enhances growth and development.

Sufficient school desegregation history exists to indicate that the path to equal educational opportunity and a quality education for most African American students is not via the outworn over reliance on racial balance remedies. The rigid adherence to racial balance remedies that ignore the diversity among cities imposes inequitable burdens on African American students and their parents, gives scant attention to the educational essentials of equal educational opportunity, ignores or deprecates the importance of African American history and culture, and/or denies African American students and their parents some choice. This approach is not only nonproductive but is actually a denial of equal educational opportunity.
Id., p. 25

Moreover,the KCMSD is already, roughly, 70% black. Thus, there are too few whites with whom to integrate, at any event. See Ross v. Houston, 699 F. 2d 218, 224 (5th Cir. 1983). Although, faithful adherence to a neighborhood school policy will result in the return of significant numbers of whites to the public school—and their return en masse will augur greater public support for the KCMSD—this return should not precipitate a return to mandatory transportation, or gerrymandered attendance zones for integration purposes. For curriculum revision, text revision, and educational personnnel re education, coupled with the scrupulously equal allocation of resources, on a per pupil basis, will remedy the real constitutional harm: the deliberate, malevolent, inculcation of inferiority complexes in black students. Should one race schools, owing to housing patterns, eventuate, such would not offend the constitution, for the district would, nevertheless, be a "unitary" district. Ross v. Houston, supra, 669 F. 2d at 227–8; Swann v. Board of Education, supra, 402 U.S. at 26; Liddell v. State of Missouri, supra, 731 F. 2d at 1314.

It should be understood, however, that amici do not oppose desegregation. Amici, in fact, favor the removal of laws and practices which deny or qualify liberty, the pursuit of happiness, life, the privileges and immunities guaranteed to all citizens, due process and the equal protection of the laws. Amici are simply of the view that in the context of the instant litigation, priority should be given to rectifying the real problem: removing the inferiority complexes. This result is not obtained by chasing (seeking to "integrate" with) white people all over—or out of—the school district. It is only obtained by slaying the dragon of racism which infects the pedagogy. Increasingly, it has come to be recognized that pupil reassignment, into and of itself, is insufficient. Much more is required. Milliken v. Bradley, 433 U.S. 267, 281 2 (1977); Reed v. Rhodes, 455 F. Supp. 569, 597 (ND, Ohio 1978). Amici contend that what is required is a frontal assault on the "real problem," which should run from kindergarten through 12th grade and be made applicable, not simply in predominantly black schools—although, obviously it should especially be the case there—but in all schools of the KCMSD.


The premises of amici shall amount to naught, however, unless the educational personnel have the power and means to effect these ends, and unless the parents of the students are seminally involved in the process.

Thus, to the extent that a neighborhood school policy is implemented, a necessary corollary to such a policy is a Board of Education which reflects such a policy. To this end, the Court is requested to cast a scrutinizing eye at the current "at large" component of the election system to determine whether such a component is compatible with the long range and short range quality education imperatives alluded to above: namely, whether persons from outside of a given neighborhood school district would be more or less inclined to confer the requisite power and resources on the most capable educational personnel to effect the salutary cost effective ends embodied in the premises of amici. A reluctant or hostile Board of Education invites, indeed, compels further litigation.

This neither suggest, nor mandates that a system of racial quotas be imposed on the Board of Education, or, for that matter, upon educational personnel. The current crisis in the KCMSD is glowing testimony to the fact that incompetence, ignorance, indifference, hostility, and insensitivity transcend race. The key concern is that, to the extent that the Court adopts all or part of the premises of amici, the implementation of those premises not be impeded by persons—of any race—opposed to such, and that the premises, above referenced, adopted by this Court in its remedial Order, lose nothing in translation.

As has been brilliantly illustrated by Dr. Reginald M. Clark in Family Life and School Achievement: Why Poor Black Children Succeed or Fail (U. of Chicago Press, 1983), parents play a vital, if not the most vital, role in assuring that their children achieve a quality education. Thus, parents must be integrally involved in fashioning, implementing, and assuring the continuing viability of the premises, above referenced, whether power or means are at issue: at home; on school committees; and/or on the Board of Education. Moreover, concomitant with power/means sharing, these parents must, further, be made to understand that they also share responsibility for the perceived success or failure of these premises—to the extent that the court adopts such—and must, further, be accountable for the conduct and performance of their children.

Indeed, without the power or means to effect the extirpation of the root cause of the problem—the myth of white superiority/black inferiority and its malicious myrmidons—quality education, these students will stand as "victims of constitutional wrongdoing...without redress," Liddell v. State of Missouri, supra, 731 F. 2d at 1315, regardless of whatever else this Court may order.

E. MOLLIFYING THE OPPOSITION

This Honorable Court is respectfully urged, moreover, to consider that the primary impetus driving certain members of the black community's insistence upon consolidation and busing for racial balance—including plan 6c—is their historically justified belief that the physical plant, equipment, textbooks, supplies, teacher's salaries, extracurricular activities, furniture, in short, every educational asset which money can buy will be inferior to that of all white, or predominantly white schools, because, left to their own devices, it is felt that white people will do as they have always done in similar circumstances in the past: disproportionately allocate fiscal resources to all white or predominantly white schools. If the court can assure these persons that resources will be allocated on a per pupil basis, then a critical hurdle impeding the conclusion of this litigation will have been overcome. If such assurances conjure images of Plessy v. Ferguson, supra, this Honorable Court is respectfully urged to consider that the most vocal proponents of consolidation and busing are those blacks whose generation knew not the vaunted advantages of Plessy. All they knew was its pain.

Presumably, liberal white proponents of consolidation and busing will, likewise, be mollified by such judicial assurances.

The equalization of resources, on a per pupil basis, though necessary to assure future equality, is not, standing alone, sufficient to remedy the vestigial effects of past discrimination, however. Further, compensatory measures and resources are needed to eradicate the harm done to black students in the KCMSD. Thus, except to the extent that the intradistrict plan sumitted by the KCMSD in response to the Court Order of January 25, 1985, involves either the importation of students from districts adjoining the KCMSD, or the exportation of students from the KCMSD to adjoining school districts—in Kansas or Missouri—amici adopt, and incorporate herein by reference, as though set out haec verba, that aspect of the KCMSD's plan which is denominated: "III. Educational Component for Remediation and for Attracting and Holding Integrated Enrollments," unless said aspect enervates the premises previously advanced by amici herein.

Amici respectfully request that this court retain jurisdiction of this cause pending specific consummation of such remedies as it may prescribe. Cognizant of the fact, however, that this Honorable Court has a busy calendar, amici respectfully request that this court enpanel an Oversight Commission, composed of persons representative of the disparate views heretofore advanced, including amici herein, to monitor the activities of the board of Education, administrators, and teachers, and to report to this court any deviations from or distortions of the specific remedies prescribed by this court; and that such commission, no fewer than three whom are black, be composed of five persons and vested with such powers and resources and emoluments and duties as are normally accorded special masters under Rule 52, F.R.C.P. In this wise, the judicial economy of this court can be preserved, and minor problems associated with implementation, which are certain to arise—if the precedents from other jurisdictions have any value—can be made to conform with this court's orders without specific judicial intervention—unless an aggrieved party is dissatisfied—consistent with such guidelines as this court may care to enunciate.


Inevitably, there must come a time when this litigation shall conclude. But when? Amici respectfully submit that this litigation shall be deemed to be concluded when the Court enters an Order upon the Report and Recommendation of the Oversight Commission that both of the following two conditions shall have obtained: 1. That black students, as a whole, on a grade by grade basis, are performing consistently with those standards established by the State of Missouri for the determination of competence for students generally administered throughout the State by the State of Missouri, or by some other means; and 2. That the Oversight Commission shall have certified to the Court that no less than one year has elapsed since it had occasion to certify a grievance to this Court arising from the specific implementation of the remedies prescribed by this Court, whether the Commission or another affected party be the grievant.

F. MEASURING THE EFFICACY OF THE REMEDIAL HEARING

The efficacy of the hearing on remedy, now before the Court, should be measured by the issue framed by the Order of September 17, 1984, to wit:

What cost effective remedy(ies) can best accord quality education to black students in the KCMSD, given said district's vestigial legacy and practice of furnishing inferior education to said students, where the KCMSD is 67.7% black; and the court order encourages, where possible, a neighborhood school policy, consonant with the 14th Amendment?

In assessing the utility of the expert testimony adduced at the hearing on remedy, this Honorable Court is further urged to remember the following salient features about the underlying litigation:

1. The victims in need of a remedy are black students in the KCMSD.
2. Quality education is the desired end.
3. The locus in quo is the deographic confines of the KCMSD.
4. The City of Kansas City, Missouri, though not a party, has a vested interest in any remedy, for not only is it benefitted by an educated, responsible, and self sufficient citizenry, but its capacity to attract and retain new businesses, from abroad, and their workforces, is directly proportional to the perceived quality of public schools.
5. Quality education and forced integration are neither, necessarily, synonymous—as many would have the court believe—nor compatible; indeed, it would appear that, in too many instances, they have been mutually exclusive.
6. The premises previously advanced by amici stand as fresh, troubling, and inevitable challenges to all parties to this litigation, which cannot, in good faith, be avoided.
7. The State of Missouri should bear the brunt of such monetary remediation as this Court may order, since it is the original and principal constitutional violator.

Amici are cognizant of the fact that by urging this Court to measure the efficacy of any remedy by its conformance to amici's premises, amici are also inviting this court to abandon the traditional remedial molds held sacrosant albeit haplessly so, in other jurisdictions. In so doing, amici are further cognizant of the fact that they are inviting this court to enter the shrine of American history by fashioning a remedy which, firstly, acknowledges, then secondly, obliterates the efficient cause of the disparity between blacks and whites in today's America those same "inferiority complexes" which are identified in Brown I, supra, sidestepped in Brown II, supra, and all but forgotten until Milliken v. Bradley, supra, 433 U.S. at 280–1, adumbrates them in form, but misses then in substance.


By the phrase"adumbrate...in form, but miss...in substance" amici only mean to suggest that remediation, that is, requiring defendants to provide remedial education to enable black students "to overcome past inadequacies in their education" Milliken, supra, at 284, should consist of much more than enabling a functionally illiterate 11th grader to read out of a 4th grade primer. For, unfortunate and as necessary as this may be, unless remediation also contemplates restoring to these black students a sense of self hood, pride, and capacity, which can only be derived from a conceptual and pragmatic break from the "mis education" of the past, when all is said and done, all that will remain is a functionally illiterate 11th grader.

The past is, indeed, prologue. Hear again the words of Chief Justice Taney as he characterizes the prevailing mood of the nation in 1857, which mood constitutes the conceptual root and vortex of present day perceptions, approaches to education, with respect to persons of African descent:

They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever a profit could be made by it. This opinion was at that time fixed and universal in the civilized portion of the white race. It was regarded as an axiom in morals as well as in politics, which no one thought of disputing, or supposed in society daily and habitually acted upon it in their private pursuits, as well as in matters of public concern, without doubting for a moment the correctness of this opinion.
Dred Scott v. Sandford, supra, 60 U.S. at 407.

Therefore, remediaation, yes, but let it be known that "Curriculum offerings and programs...designed to compensate minority group children for unequal educational opportunities resulting from past or present racial isolation" Milliken, pupra, 433 U.S. at 285, must be principallly aimed at and have a substantive impact upon "...that feeling of inferiority" referenced in Brown I; for only such an approach "...promises realistically to work, and indispensable realistically to work now." Green v. County School Board, supra, 391 U.S. at 438–439. All else has been tried. All else has failed. For the words of Justice Taney yet live.

What one reaps is what one sows, truly. American public education has sown welfare recipients, and so has it reaped. It has sown juvenile delinquency, and so has it reaped. It has sown white racism, and so has it reaped. It has sown black dependence and despair, and so has it reaped.

This court, however, is pivotally situated to sow new seed. It can sow quality education; that is, the TRUTH, with bias or malice toward none, and it can reap a quality citizenry. It can sow racial harmony, by insisting upon the promulgation of the TRUTH (quality education) while abandoning sources of discord (forced integration), and reap racial harmony. It can sow a proud, patriotic, self reliant citizenry at the stroke of a pen, and reap a proud, patriotic and sellf reliant citizenry.


On the other hand, by disregarding the most central indispensable, and quintessential fact of American history—black chattel slavery—from which all that is American derives its essence; and by disregarding the laws, decrees, policies and attitudes which, in spite of the eradication of the institution of servitude, have filled the void to assure the continuance of the condition of servitude, all the court's time, energy and acumen will have been for naught. The battle is for the mind. The mind. So has it ever been. SO shall it ever be.

Listen, for one last time, to the admonition of Dr. Carter G. Woodson:

In like manner, the teaching of history in the Negro area has had its political significance. Starting our after the Civil War, the opponents of freedom and social justice decided to work out a program which would enslave the Negroes' mind inasmuch as the freedom of body had to be conceded. It was well understood that if by teaching of history the white man could be further assured of his superiority and the Negro could be made to feel that he had always been a failure and that the subjection of his will to some other race is necessary the freedman, then, would still be a slave. If you can control a man's thinking you do not have to worry about his action. When you determine what a man shall think you do not have to concern yourself about what he will do. If you make a man feel that he is inferior, you do not have to compel him to accept an inferior status, for he will seek it himself. If you make a man think that he is justly an outcast, you do not have to order him to the back door. He will go without being told; and if there is no back door, his very nature will demand one.
Mis Education, pp. 84–5.

Hence, this Court rightly established the liability of the State of Missouri, which denied Dred Scott and which barred Lloyd Gaines for the educational torts committed against black students, and KCMSD, which stipulated to its complicity, in the perpetration of these educational torts. Jenkins v. State of Missouri, supra, at p. 1493. The only question now worthy of consideration is whether this Court is willing to assault the bastion of the beast (mis education culminating in inferiority complexes), or whether it will resign itself to building tall fences (neighborhod schools without more) in a futile effort to contain the beast.

History, a city, and a people are at stake either way.

Amici neither covet, nor presume upon this court. Amici seek only to clarify some perspectives which, heretofore, no other party, nor amicus, has dared to address... for whatever reason.

Amici can think of no more fitting denouement than to conclude with the prophetic words of Mr. Justice Powell, in his concurring opinion in Keyes v. School District No 1., supra, 413 U.S. at 253:


It is well to remember that the course we are running is a long one and the goal sought in the end—so often overlooked—is the best possible educational opportunity for all children. Communities deserve the freedom and the incentive to turn their attention and energies to this goal of quality education, free from protracted and debilitating battles over court ordered student transportation. The single most disruptive element in education today is the widespread use of compulsory transportation, especially at elementary grade levels. This has risked distracting and diverting attention from basic educational ends, dividing and embittering communities, and exacerbating, rather than ameliorating, interracial friction and misunderstanding. It is time to return to a more balanced evaluation of the recognized interest of our society in achieving desegregation with other educational and societal interest a community may legitimately assert. This will help assure that integrated school systems will be established and maintained by rational action, will be better understood and supported by parents and children of both races, and will promote the enduring qualities of an integrated society so essential to its genuine success.

III. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

Amici make the following recommendations to the Court:

1. That the premises of amici, above referenced, be adopted in toto.
2. That the Court accept amici's recommendations relative to Article III of the KCMSD's plan, as qualified by amici.
3. That the Oversight Commission be constituted having the power of special masters.
4. That the financial burden of rectification and remediation be borne by the State of Missouri.

Further amici seeketh naught.

Signed
Larry Delano Coleman, Esq.
The Kansas City Citizens for Quality Education
8801 E. 63rd St. # 208
Raytown, Missouri 64133
(816) 737-3840 (o)
(816) 737-3177 (fax)
Lcole81937@aol.com–email
www.Larrydcoleman.com–website


Certificate of Service

This is to certify that on this 3rd day of May, 1985, a copy of the attached "Brief of the Kansas City Citizens for Quality Education, Respecting Remedy, as Amicus Curiae" was mailed to the below named counsel of record:

Arthur Benson, Esq.
Benson & McKay
911 Main St., #1430
Kansas City, MO 64105

Attorney for Plaintiffs
_________________

William Webster

Attorney General, State of MO
Supreme Court Building
P. O. Box 899
Jefferson City, MO 65101

Attorney for Defendants
State of Missouri
_________________

James Borthwick
Blackwell Sanders et. al.
5 Crown Center
2480 Pershing Road
Kansas City, MO 64108

Attorney for Defendants
Kansas City, MO School District

APPENDIX

Bibliography of the books sited in this Brief from the National Alliance of Black School Educators, Inc.'s Task Force on Black Academic and Cultural Excellence's report—Saving the African American Child.

12. James, George G. M. (1976) Stolen Legacy. San Francisco: Julian Richardson.

13. Meyer, I. (1900) Oldest Books in the World: An Account of the Religion, Wisdom, Philisophy, Ethics Psychology, Manners, Proverbs, Sayings, Refinements, etc. of the Ancient Egyptians. New York: E.W. Dayton.

14. Massey, G. (1974) Book of the Beginnings. Secaucus, New Jersey: University Bookstore (first published 1881).

15. Williams, C. (1974) The Destruction of Black Civilization. Chicago: Third World Press.

16. Ngubane, J. K. (1979) Conflict of Minds. new York: Books in Focus.

17. Hilliard, A. G. III (1984), "Pedagogy in Ancient KMT (Egypt)," Paper presented to first Annual Ancient Egyptian Studies Conference. Los Angeles.

18. Blyden, E. W. (1967) Christianity, Islam and the Negro. Edinburgh: University Press (first published 1887).

19. Padmore, G. (1936) Africa: How Britain Rules Africa London.


20. Williams, C. (1974) op. cit.

21. Rodney, W. (1974) How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press.

22. Chinuweiza (1975) The West and the Rest of Us. New York: Vintage.

23. Bullock, H. A. (1970) A History of Negro Education in the South New York: Praeger.

24. DuBois, W. E. B. (1973) Black Reconstruction in America 1860–1880. New York: Atheneum (first published, 1935).

25. King, K. (1971) Pan Africanism and Education: A Study of Race, Philanthropy, and Education in the Southern States of America and East Africa. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

26. Weinberg, M. (1977) A Chance to Learn: A History of Race and Education in the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.

27. Spivey, D. (1978) Schooling for the New Slavery: Black Industrial Education: 1868–1915. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

28. Woodson, C. G. (1977) Miseducation of the Negro. Washington, D. C.: Associated Publishers (first published 1933).

44. Arnelle, H. J. (1979) "Education and the Just Society," The North Central Association Quarterly.

45. Fanon, F. (1967) Black Skin White Mask. New York: Grove.

46. Heller, K., Holtzman, W., and Messick, S. (eds.) (1983), Placing children In Special Education: Strategies for Eequity. Waashington, D. C.: National Academy Press.

47. Wigder, A. (1982), Ability, Testing, Uses and Consequences. Washington D. C. : National Academy Press.

48. Hilliard, A. G. III, "The Socio Political Implications of Minimum Competency Testing" in Neel, J. and Goldwasser, S. W. (Eds.) (1982), Minimum Competency Education. Atlanta: Georgia State University Department of Educational Fundations, pp. 85–106.

49. Miller, V. (February 1979), "The Emergent Pattern of Integration," Education Leadership.

50. Powell, G. J. (1973) Black Monday's Children: A Study of the Effects of School Desegration on Self Concepts of Southern Children. New York: Appleton Century Crofts.

54. Miller, V. (February 1979), "The Emergent Pattern of Integration," Education Leadership

Larry Delano Coleman, Esq. Main page
DuBois Learning Center Homepage | Kansas City’s African American Community

GRADATIONS OF GIVING AND SHARING

GRADATIONS OF GIVING AND SHARING

Thursday, March 17, 2011

By Rev. Dr. Larry Delano Coleman
A. INDEX:
1. Matthew 5:42—Share with beggars and borrowers
2. Matthew 13:44—share no precious information. Purchase first!
3. Matthew 25:10—Don’t share with a foolish virgin; it may imperil you
4. Matthew 7:6—Beware of with whom you share sacred pearls of wisdom
5. Luke 10:25-37—merciful and compassionate sharing is true religion
6. Matthew 15:21-28—Christ’s crumbs are a shared blessing!
7. Matthew 10:5-15—Freely you have received, freely share, if worthy
8. Luke 6:38—Share and it will be shared with you in good measure!
9. Matthew 25:41-46—Sharing with one of “the least of these” is salvific.
10. 1 John 3:17—Share your excess with a needy brother or sister
11. Matthew 21:33-41—Treachery can pervert sharing and merit reprisal
12. John 15:12-13--Ultimate sharing; “Lay down his life for his friends”

B. TREATMENT:

I could not find, nor do I recall where, in the gospels, Jesus Christ specifically used the word “share” or “sharing;” or, for that matter, if he ever used either word.

Even so, “sharing,” as we understand it, was his lifelong mission and purpose. It was what he taught, encouraged, and commanded wherever we went on Earth.
Instead of “sharing,” the verb “giving,” or a derivative, appears to be used instead throughout the gospels.

“Money” was meant, primarily, then as well as now. But, not only money was to be shared or given. Also included was love, faith, and hope. Provisions like food, water, clothing, and visiting the sick or the imprisoned, were also to be shared or given.

Jesus also understood the risk of indiscriminate sharing with the unworthy. He, therefore, counseled discernment and circumspection even upon his disciples.
There are, it appears, gradations of “giving” or “sharing” that he recognized and acknowledged, which depend upon time and circumstances. These, too, are treated.

C. APPLICATIONS

1. Matthew 5:42 says, Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.

Here, both beggars and borrowers are to be paid by you.

2. Matthew 13:44 says:

New International Version (©1984)
"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field.

Here, there was no precious info sharing at all, before the field was purchased.

3. Matthew 25:1-10 says:

The Parable of the Ten Virgins
1 “At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. 2 Five of them were foolish and five were wise. 3 The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. 4 The wise ones, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. 5 The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.
6 “At midnight the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’
7 “Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. 8 The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.’
9 “‘No,’ they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’
10 “But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.

Here, the wise virgins did not share with the foolish virgins.

4. Matthew 7:6 says:

New International Version (©1984)
"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.


Dogs don’t appreciate sacred things and pigs don’t eat pearls, so use discretion.

5. Luke 10:25-37 says: The Parable of the Good Samaritan
25(AS) And behold, a(AT) lawyer stood up to(AU) put him to the test, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to(AV) inherit eternal life?" 26He said to him, "What is written in the Law? How do you read it?" 27And he answered,(AW) "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and(AX) your neighbor as yourself." 28And he said to him, "You have answered correctly;(AY) do this, and you will live."
29But he,(AZ) desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" 30Jesus replied, "A man(BA) was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31Now by chance a(BB) priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32So likewise(BC) a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33But a(BD) Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34He went to him and(BE) bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35And the next day he took out two(BF) denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, 'Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.' 36Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" 37He said, "The one who showed him mercy." And Jesus said to him, "You go, and do likewise."

Here, merciful and compassionate sharing trumps religion; is true religion

6. Matthew 15: 21-28 says:

The Faith of a Canaanite Woman

21 Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.”
23 Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”
24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
25 The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”
28 Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.

Here, Christ blesses the believing Canaanite woman, content with his “crumbs”.

7. Matthew 10:5-15 says

5These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. 7As you go, preach this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven is near.’ 8Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy,b drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. 9Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; 10take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep.
11“Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave. 12As you enter the home, give it your greeting. 13If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. 14If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. 15I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. 16I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

Here the message is direct: “Freely you have received, freely give”, if worthy.

8. Luke 6:38 says:

Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

Here, the promise is reciprocal, intuitive and endearing “Give, and it will be given to you.”

9. Matthew 25:41-46 says:

Then He will also say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; 42for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; 43I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’ 44“Then they themselves also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?’ 45“Then He will answer them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46“These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Here, whatever one does not do to “one of the least of these” is the salvific test.
This test very much echoes one of John’s epistles:

10. 1 John 3:17: If someone has enough money to live well and sees a brother or sister in need but shows no compassion--how can God's love be in that person?

Share you excess with the needy brother and sister.

11. Matthew 21:33-41 says:

"Listen to another illustration. A landowner planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, made a winepress, and built a watchtower. Then he leased it to vineyard workers and went on a trip. 34"When the grapes were getting ripe, he sent his servants to the workers to collect his share of the produce. 35The workers took his servants and beat one, killed another, and stoned a third to death. 36So the landowner sent more servants. But the workers treated them the same way. 37"Finally, he sent his son to them. He thought, 'They will respect my son.' 38"When the workers saw his son, they said to one another, 'This is the heir. Let's kill him and get his inheritance.' 39So they grabbed him, threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him. 40"Now, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those workers?" 41They answered, "He will destroy those evil people. Then he will lease the vineyard to other workers who will give him his share of the produce when it is ready."
Here, we have treachery perverting and corrupting sharing, warranting retribution.

12. John 15:12-13 says:

“This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. 13Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.”
This is ultimate sharing, the highest exemplification of love, sharing one’s very life.

D. CONCLUSION

There may be other kinds of sharing in the gospels,not mentioned herein, and in the Bible, itself. But these few examples as taught by Jesus are of undoubted reliability.

GREBES IN MY BACKYARD

Tuesday, March 15, 2011
By Rev. Dr. Larry Delano Coleman

GREBES IN MY BACKYARD


There’s Donald Duck, Daffy Duck, and Daisy Duck, all famous cartoon characters. Enter now, “Diving Duck,” also known as a “Grebe”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pied-billed_Grebe

On television, I have thrilled in watching diving birds in nature shows. I had also seen them online. But, until I personally observed a diving duck, one cold morning in March, in our neighborhood lake, behind my back yard, I hadn’t given them much thought.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diving_duck

Why had not noticed this before, I wondered. Northern geese and Mallard ducks are year-round features. Where had this unusual diving fowl been? I decided to investigate this bird one day.

Order: Podicipediformes Family: Podicipedidae


Pied-billed Grebe

Grebes are small to medium-large sized freshwater diving birds. They have lobed toes, and are excellent swimmers and divers. However, they have their feet placed far back on the body, making them quite ungainly on land. There are 20 species world-wide, 7 North American species, and 6 Missouri species.

• Pied-billed Grebe, Podilymbus podiceps
• Horned Grebe, Podiceps auritus
• Red-necked Grebe, Podiceps grisegena
• Eared Grebe, Podiceps nigricollis
• Western Grebe, Aechmorphorus occidentalis
• Clark's Grebe, Aechmorphorus clarkii

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_birds_of_Missouri#Grebes

The Pied-billed Grebe is small, stocky, and short-necked. It is 31–38 cm (12–15") in length, it has a wingspan of 45–62 cm (18–24") and weighs 253–568 g (8.93–20.05 ounces).[1] It is usually brown or gray in color. It has a short, blunt chicken-like bill, which in summer is encircled by a broad black band (hence the name). It is the only grebe that does not show a white wing patch in flight.

The sexes in grebes are monomorphic (meaning no sexual dimorphism). In other words, the males and females look just alike.

There are also some “Eared Grebes” in our lake. They are very dark with gold ear tufts, a bright red eye and a white under-belly.

Unlike Cormorants which also dive to catch fish, but which are prevented from swallowing them by a neck band, which its fisherman-master prudently snaps around its long neck, nothing constrains these Missouri Grebes, from gorging themselves on aquatic invertebrates, and also on small fish and amphibians (frogs, tadpoles). Pied-billed and Eared Grebes also eat their own feathers to aid in digestion (prevent injury from small bones).

The Pied Bill Grebe is the most widespread of North American grebes, it is found on many open waters, such as remote ponds, marshes, and sluggish streams. It is usually the first grebe to arrive on northern inland waters in springtime, and the last to leave in autumn. It is rare on salt water.

This grebe is usually silent, except in breeding season when the male voices a loud, laughing cuck, cuck, cuck or cow, cow, cow. It rarely flies, preferring to escape danger by diving.

Folk names of this grebe include dabchick, devil-diver, dive-dapper, hell-diver, and water witch.

During diving, the young clamp their bills over their parents' feathers. Riding on the backs of their parents serves a twofold purpose for eared grebe chicks. Besides protecting them from predators, the position allows them an easy way to eat some of the parent's feathers. This is done because the gizzard in fish-eaters doesn't sufficiently crush bones as they're swallowed. The parental feathers in the stomach, which are formed into balls, protect the thin stomach wall from being punctured by sharp bones. They also slow digestive process, so bones dissolve rather than pass into the intestine.

http://www.apogeephoto.com/oct2001/along102001.shtml

On occasion, I’ve observed all three aquatic birds in or near the lake at the same time. Each sticks to its own kind, and its own forage. Our northern geese eat what’s on the ground. The ducks eat what’s on top of the water and the grebes eat what’s under the water. Thereby, everybody’s happy. And so is this interested observer.

“A certain symbiosis” -- a sermon

“A certain symbiosis” -- a sermon

Friday, December 10, 2010
Sunday, March 13, 2011

By Rev. Dr. Larry Delano Coleman

Input and output correlate. What you put into something is usually what you get out of it. If you sow onions, don’t look for tomatoes.

In other words there’s a symbiotic relationship between sowing and reaping.

“Symbiotic” means “close and often long-term interactions” between different things.
Symbiotic relationships may be either obligate, i.e., necessary for the survival of at least one of the organisms involved, or facultative, where the relationship is beneficial but not essential for survival of the organisms.[9][10]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbiosis

Push down the accelerator the car speeds up. Push down the brake the car slows down.
That’s symbiosis. Today we examine “a certain symbiosis.”

Let’s say that together: “a certain symbiosis”—One more time: “a certain symbiosis.” “A Certain Symbiosis between us and Jesus Christ” is our topic.

Let the church say “Amen!”

In 2 chronicles 15:1-2, (ESV) we find:

The Spirit of God came upon Azariah the son of Oded, 2and he went out to meet Asa and said to him, "Hear me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin:(B) The LORD is with you while you are with him.(C) If you seek him, he will be found by you,(D) but if you forsake him, he will forsake you. 3(E)

That’s symbiosis, y’all. And that’s fair!
If you seek him, he will be found by you,(D) but if you forsake him, he will forsake you.

Another scripture says “seek and ye shall find.” Matthew 7:7.

Another says: “Give and it will be given unto you, a good measure pressed down, shaken together and running over will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” Luke 6:38!

This, too, is symbiosis, y ‘all! Are you praying with me. I can’t hear you.
The same measure you measure with will be measured back to you! An omer was an old unit of measure, roughly equal to two quarts, half a gallon.

In Exodus 16:16-18 we find some more symbiosis.

This is what the LORD has commanded: "Each one is to gather as much as he needs. Take an omer for each person you have in your tent."

The Israelites did as they were told; some gathered much, some little. 18When they measured it with an omer, he who had gathered much had no excess, and he who had gathered little had no lack; every man gathered as much as he should eat. ”

He who gathered much had no excess. He who gathered little did not lack! That’s also symbiosis, y’all!


Lady Day—Billy Holliday-- would say “You can help yourself, but don’t take too much. Momma may have and poppa may have. But, God bless the child who’s got his own, who’s got his own!”

Nothing’s going to be handed out to you on a silver platter. You’ve got to work for everything you get. And sometimes you’ve got to work for what you don’t get!

The Temptin’ Temptations used to sing, “To get water from faucet, you’ve got to turn it. To get ashes from wood, you’ve got to burn it. To get butter from milk, you’ve got to churn it. And if you want my love, if you want my love, you’ve got to earn it!”

Many of us have been taught to believe that we don’t have to work to be saved; all we have to do is profess a belief in Jesus Christ in order to achieve salvation. In fact, one brother stated exactly that in Sunday School, directly to my face. I didn’t quarrel with him. Many believe as he do. That’s false teaching.

Jesus worked every day to do the will of the Father who sent him. Now, if Jesus, Mary’s baby, God’s only begotten son, had to work, every day, including the Sabbath, you and I “sho’ nuff” have to work some time, every once in a great while, periodically, occasionally!

Are you praying with me? Wouldn’t you agree?


<< John 9:4 >>


I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.


Work is part of the symbiosis of redemption and salvation. Time after time, Christ excoriates those lazy folks who think they’re already saved, and don’t have nothing left to do, but be whisked away to Heaven for eternity.

Many of these same folk who have never fed the hungry, never clothed the naked, never visited the sick, or those in jail, have got the nerve to boast about being saved!

Ain’t that something! The biggest hypocrites in the world are the first in line to go to heaven!

Just like the emptiest wagon makes the most noise, so are these vain boasters! What did Jesus say to these vain boasters? What did the master say to these raging hypocrites?

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
45 “He will reply,‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Matthew 25:40-46

Whatever you did not “do”----“do”----“do”---“do” is what decides it! Jesus said “do”. Not believe, not think, not faith, not pray, not love, not hope, not confess! The operative verb is “do”! Doing is working! And not doing ain't nothing!

Remember Beethoven’s Fifth: “do”----“do”----“do”---“dooooooo”!

As in “Do unto others , as you would have them do unto you!” Mark 6:30.

The golden rule! That too is symbiosis.

“A certain symbiosis!” Y’all!

Thank you! And God bless you!
#30

“ADVENTURES OF TOM SAWYER”: A BOOK REVIEW

“ADVENTURES OF TOM SAWYER”:
A BOOK REVIEW

Saturday, March 12, 2011
Rev. Dr. Larry Delano Coleman


Mark Twain has written a rousing good yarn in his 1876 novel “Adventures of Tom Sawyer.”

The story is set in a mythical symbolic town, with mythical symbolic characters, in a mythical symbolic time. But, the emotions, sentiments felt and expressed in this classic are real. So real, one feels them as one reads breathlessly onward, from episode to episode, toward the fearful and joyful end.

The book’s principal character is Tom Sawyer, one of two filial orphans, being raised by Aunt Polly. Sidney, Tom’s younger half-brother, is Tom’s first in a long series of foils. Cherubic, as Tom is mischievous, Sidney’s suspicions are repeatedly piqued, yet repeatedly diverted or thwarted by Tom’s smooth craftiness and aplomb. Sidney is a good student. Tom is contentedly average. Sidney is well-behaved in church. Tom is notoriously bad. Sidney is obedient. Tom is usually not. Aunt Polly, the loving and befuddled matriarch, is another foil: the classic fretter and hand-wringer, as Tom’s evasions and exploitations whirl and unfurl against her, and others’, settled backdrop of community values.

Then, there’s Huckleberry Finn, the final foil. Huck, whose absent father is the town drunkard, does not go to school, nor appear to have a definite home, nor even a bed. Yet, he is befriended by Tom, whom he idolizes, as he is deputized and engrafted into a successive series of escalating and reinforcing adventures. Huck is naïve as Tom is worldly. Huck is unread, while Tom, pretensions aside, is reasonably well read. Tom is the leader. Huck is the follower.

Indeed, everyone in this story is Tom Sawyer’s foil or follower, whether wittingly or unwittingly!

Broadly, the story recounts Tom’s initiatory adventures into manhood, culminating in a harrowing cave escapade with Becky Thatcher, Tom’s girl friend, which was also the hideaway and treasure trove of “Injun Joe,” the murderous villain Tom and Huck secretly observe kill a man at midnight in the town cemetery. Tom later exposed Injun Joe at trial after he almost succeeded framing an innocent man, Muff Potter, another drunkard. Injun Joe escapes by diving out the courthouse window, after he’s exposed by Tom.

Tom’s miraculous escape from, and rescue of Becky from, the cave, while arranging for Injun Joe’s demise therein exalts him to town hero. His subsequent recovery of Injun Joe’s stolen gold coin treasury in the cave, that he splits with Huck, pursuant to previous agreement, made Tom and Huck town demigods, even as it set up its classic sequel, “Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.”

Great yarn! And that’s just scratching the surface!

Get your “but” out of here!

Get your “but” out of here!

By Rev. Dr. Larry Delano Coleman

Ironically, Biblical interpretation can lead to many disputes.

My maternal uncle and I had one a few weeks ago on the question of original sin and the nature of man. So, as usual, we opened the Bible to settle the question. Of course, the Bible, itself, created the question!

The scripture, Gen. 1:31 plainly says—

“God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.”

"The phrase, ‘All that he had made’ includes man, necessarily, Uncle.” I said. “That is because God also made man.” I then referred him to this scripture:

So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
Gen.1:27.

“So, Uncle, ‘Man,’ being part of the ‘all he had made’ is also ‘very good,’ not inherently bad, evil or sinful.” I insisted.

“But…” intoned my uncle.

“Ain’t no ‘but’ in there, nowhere, Uncle! So, get your ‘but’ out of here!” I said, before I realized what I had said. The pun: but/butt had slipped out.

I had been speaking over the telephone to my mother’s brother.
We, my siblings and I, simply didn’t use that manner of speaking to older relatives. Even though I was 59, at the time, myself, when that involuntary pun slipped out of my mouth, I immediately apologized. We’d been raised better than that by both parents, and my uncle knew it!

He chuckled, himself, at my startling utterance, and went on to agree with it, in spite of himself. The double entendre “butt” and “but” was so sudden, and so stunning, you couldn’t help but laugh. It was like a “discovered check” on the chess board! In this case, it was a discovered checkmate!

So went our good-natured repartee on original sin, and the alleged “fall” of man. It was one of many theological discussions between us. Most of the time, he got me. Today, I’d turned the tables.

My uncle and I were always discussing theological questions over the telephone, since we lived 250 miles apart. I knew my uncle’s ways, well. He was Mississippi-ole school Baptist, whose daddy and grand-daddy had been Mississippi- ole school Baptist preachers.

On one previous occasion, he had told me that Genesis did not accurately describe “the beginning.” But, the book of John did. That one floored me. So, we turned to that book. Sure enough, it said:

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

John 1:1-5. That reference had, frankly, surprised me, and left me slightly exasperated. So, not desiring to get lambasted yet again with such a scriptural hay-maker, I had cut my uncle off, unwisely and imprudently, to my detriment.

I have since inwardly resolved to never do that again!

Our most recent “debate” concerned itself with whether Peter had been “too proud to pray” for the former Samaritan mystic/sorcerer, Simon, who had become wealthy through his sorcery?

Simon, along with many other Samaritans, had been undergone conversion and baptism by Phillip. Later, after his conversion and baptism, Simon had been sternly rebuked by Peter, of all people, (considering Peter’s multiple rebukes and later forgiveness by Jesus) after his conversion to “The Way.” Simon had offered to pay Peter for knowledge of the Holy Ghost and for the gift of healing, by the laying on of hands, in Acts 8:14-25, after seeing Peter and John lay hands upon and heal worshippers, who received the Holy Ghost.

After his rebuke, Simon had asked Peter to pray for him, so he might avoid experiencing the scourges in Peter’s rebuke. Peter ignored his request for prayer and went on with his business as though Simon didn’t exist.

I argued that Peter was wrong for refusing to pray for Simon, after his rebuke. My uncle, naturally, took the orthodox view, insisting that Peter had done nothing wrong, because Simon’s heart was not right with God. I told my uncle the scripture didn’t mention anything about the rightness of Simon’s heart. Besides, 2 Chr. 25:2, doesn’t require that your heart be right, as long as you do what is right in the sight of God. That scripture says: “And he did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, yet not with a whole heart.”

Well, there we left it in Jesus’ name, till our next theological visit.

#30