It was many years ago, in a warm and sunny day, the opposition leader emerged from the plane, getting ready to present a new vision for an oppressed nation. He was greeted by crowds welcoming him back home from exile, driven out by a president who silenced all his opponents by proclaiming them enemies of the nation. Unbeknowngst to him, his return to his beloved homeland will be his last day. A gunman took the life of this man and snuffed the voice that dared to speak against a regime that has become corrupt, against leaders that has enriched themselves instead of lifting the people from poverty.

     What would prevent this American Nation from being overrun by corrupt leaders who will kill those who oppose them? The founding fathers of the American nation wanted to create a nation where this would not happen. They came from nations that have an established religion, and those not of the established religion are treated as second class citizens. They came from nations where a person can be harmed for questioning its leaders. Therefore, the founding fathers formed a nation where freedom of speech, religion, assembly, etc. are honored. These freedoms guaranteed that nobody will be persecuted for expressing their conscience. Nobody will be persecuted for opposing the policies of the government. Nobody will be persecuted for worshipping in a way that is different from the majority.

     Today these freedoms have been reinterpreted to support the interests of some over the interests of others. The freedom of speech is under attack by those who want to silence opposition to their lifestyle, in the guise of promoting their civil rights. The freedom of religion has been used by those who want to remove vestiges of the presence of the divine in public life, in the guise of maintaining the separation of church and state.

     Why am I expressing these observations? To remind us that this country is built on the sacredness of conscience, that everyone is free to hold to their ideas of right and wrong and free to express it. This foundation can both be good and bad. It opens the way for prophetic voices that could freely confront evil in society. It allows voices to confront evils like American slavery and abortion on demand, which destroys human beings in different ways. On the other hand, the sacredness of conscience also means that those evils can be freely defended in the name of progress and women's rights, public goods for many people. What do we do with this ambivalent nature of freedom- that it serves both good and bad? It is a hard question and despite its dangers, it is a principle that we need to defend for the sake of our own freedom. This calls for charity towards those who disagree wih us, even to the point of defending their right to speak their conscience.

     A question was posed to me a long time ago by a friend. He asked me "Why are Christians against Polygamy when the bible does not explicitly forbid it?" He has a point, the bible does not explicitly prohibit polygamy. I believe though that monogamy was affirmed as the better way when the apostle Paul proclaimed that a church leader should be married to one woman.

    As I reflected on this question, I thought about how life would have been in the household of Jacob, the patriarch of Israel. He had two wives, Rachel and Leah, not to mention concubines. Imagine Jacob having an argument with Rachel and Rachel was so upset with him she throws him out of her tent. Jacob has a choice, he could try to reconcile with Rachel or say to himself, I don't need her, I have Leah. He will just have to go to Leah to get his love tank filled. That second choice will be painless and does not require humility. Even worse, Jacob could have said, "I'm tired of you Rachel" and threw her out. The fact that he did not do this is commendable. He knew he had to take care of Rachel and he gave her his faithfulness.

     The prohibition of sexual immorality- any sex outside of the bonds of marriage, is rooted in God's goal of creating a culture of faithfulness. The truth is, sex creates attachment. It is a powerful force that dissipates a person's relational energy. It is a giving of the self and the possessing of another soul. Some may argue that it is just a bodily function, persons using each other for pleasure. That is exploitative, valuing a person only for the pleasure they give, not for their whole self. We now have people running around unable to create lasting bonds, because they have become used to destroying bonds and the pain it brings. What would be the condition of souls who feel that they can be discarded at any moment and that they can do the same thing? What kind of society is being built?

     Politicians think about how they can reform the welfare system. The truth is that the ideal social net is the family because of the natural bond. That is why there is a command to honor parents, and there are regulations about family members redeeming their own from debt. I always wonder where the families of the beggars in our streets are. The best explanation is that they are somehow estranged. Jesus brought together a culture of faithfulness, the church, where a spiritual bond exists. Although the church is called to bear individuals' burdens like a family would, it also calls the person to reconcile his broken relationships. One way the church becomes salt and light to the world is by promoting reconciliation, the rebuilding of relationships. I remember in college, being immersed in my Christian fellowship that I was satisfied being estranged, at least psychologically, from my family. I now realize that my attitude should have been conciliatory. This does not mean that a person should always follow the family. Christ and his glory has become the main priority for a Christian. A Hindu who becomes Christian should not worship idols, even if it causes her to be disowned. However, she should still attempt to be conciliatory, treating her family with gentleness and respect just because it is right.

     The culture of faithfulness builds individuals who feel safe, that there will always be someone familiar in their life, that nobody will harm them purposely, that they can count on their spouses to be with them through good times and bad times, that their neighbors will respect what they have worked for, that they can trust that their neighbors will not destroy their reputation, and that their neighbors are satisfied with what they have. In a culture of faithfulness, individuals are loved for themselves, not for what they could give. How can this culture of faithfulness be built? By striving to live by God's command to love our neighbors, including those whom we consider enemies.

     Jesus led the way to the building of this culture by dying on the cross. His death on the cross is his way of reconciling us to God, something we need but can't do for ourselves. He invites us to follow him to the cross, joining ourselves to him in faith, believing that his way will bring us peace, and bring peace to our broken world.  

     The recent shootings in Tucson, AZ have prompted calls from many politicians, including the president, to tone down political rhetoric. This begs the question, how can rhetoric be toned down? It is subjective whether a statement is inflammatory or not. We also must be careful about limiting free speech, even though there is a chance that rhetoric would instigate violence.

     I believe that what the nation needs is not just toned down political rhetoric but to become a culture of truth. We must become lovers of truth, not purveyors of misinformation. Near the midterm elections, there was a radio station that was calling everyone to come out and vote to stop the Republicans, who are characterized as being for the rich and not for the poor. They wanted people to vote to continue the advances made by President Obama and the democrats, and stop the Republicans who would bring the nation backwards. 

     What is bothersome about this? First, its the black and white characterization of reality. The truth is that there are Republicans, as there are democrats, who have concern for the poor. They just have different ideas on how much or how less government should get involved in society. The reality is that jobs come from businesses. Therefore, it makes sense to think that a friendly business environment (low taxes, less regulation) is a good thing. Second, The opinionated radio hosts conveniently forget that taxes come from hardworking people who have trouble making ends meet. Instead of the people using their money to stimulate the economy and take responsibility to help their neighbor, the money goes to the government, which is interested in building its programs. The fact is, although there is a case for government helping the poor, that help comes at the expense of hardworking people. This is not completely just, although it is understandable that wealth has to be redistributed to help the poor.

     There are people who divide the world into oppressed and oppressors, and the oppressed give themselves permission to be hateful and feel morally superior. The truth is a case can be made for seeing ourselves as both oppressors and oppressed at the same time. Think about the weave, especially the human kind. Asians, Blacks, and Whites sell them to black women, who are somehow led to believe that they need it to be beautiful. The human hair usually comes from Indian women, who are led to believe that they are offering their hair to their gods. Instead, their hair end up in the hands of businessmen who export their hair, and their hair end up in American stores. The system is built on misinformation and manufactured need- straight hair is better.

     How would a culture of truth look like? It would be characterized by humility, because it knows it does not have all the answers. It knows that it is infected by sin, therefore it woud be characterized by repentance. Truthful people know that they cannot make themselves or their world right. They will turn to a power outside themselves, a power that is filled with grace and truth.

     I was listening to the radio and heard an interchange concerning airport security. The topic was the use of pat-downs by TSA personnel for those who refuse to be subjected to the body scanners. The guest in the talk show was a woman who has experienced sexual abuse and she talked about how the pat downs made her feel traumatized again. On the phone line was a woman who basically said that the guest was overreacting and talked about the importance of security to save lives. The guest made an interesting retort. She said that Christians should stand with those who are vulnerable in society, including victims of abuse. Although that is true, it is problematic that the guest seems to imply that a "Christian" perspective would oppose the pat-downs.

   I have heard people say that their view is the "Christian" perspective. This is a subtle way to quell any dissent. The motivation behind finding a "Christian" perspective may be a real desire to honor God, not intentionally quelling dissent. Nevertheless, there are two problems with the search for a "Christian" perspective.

     First, when the Apostle John told the audience of his letter to test the ideas of the day to see if they are in line with God's revelation, he was not talking only to church leaders. He was talking to a congregation. In other words, it is the responsibility of all Christians to test the ideas that they encounter in their respective environments. It is the responsibility of a Christian child to test the attitude of his peers towards the weak. Christian adults should guide him, not just give him their perspective. The Pastor should give guidance to the congregation in testing ideas, not give them a "Christian" perspective. Every Christian should engage their respective cultures, not just tow the party line.  

     Second, most issues are complicated enough that one perspective would not deal justly with the issue. The caller in the show could have retorted that there are people in the plane that are also valuable to God, including helpless children. Is it not also "Christian" to stand with these helpless people? The guest may retort that no matter what we do, anybody who is determined could get past airport security. The caller may retort that it is society's responsibility to do everything they can to prevent tragedies. The discussion could go on and on in this issue and many other issues.

     Instead of finding one perspective, it is better to listen and empathize with all the concerns of our world. Then engage those concerns with the Christian narrative. God is concerned for the weak so Christians should be concerned for the weak. Christians will differ in how they care for the weak, and hopefully, there would be love in the midst of those differences.

     The anniversary of Pearl Harbor prompted me to reflect on the quesion "Why were the leaders of that time caught off-guard by this event?' I believe that most people underestimated the power of ideology. They did not think that human beings are capable of great evil. The same answer can be given to the quesion "Why did the world not stand up to Nazi Germany sooner?" 

     The truth is, committment to ideology could cause people to justify horrible crimes against humanity. The Nazi vision of a perfect race justified the kidnapping of Nordic looking children from their parents. Catholic church leaders in Spain, those who were supposed to protect the weak, backed Franco's revolution, which displaced thousands of Spanish children. Conscience does serve to soften the power of ideology, however, conscience can be silenced by tyranny.

     True ideologues do not seek peace and the welfare of all people, but seek to fulfill their vision at all costs. There is a new ideology that is rising in our time. This ideology is called Politial Correctness. The vision of this ideology is a world where all people have the right to pursue whatever lifestyle they choose, without any judgment. This ideology would make itself palatable to God's people by emphasizing the all-encompassing grace of God, and leaving out the greatness of human sinfulness. The cost of victory for this ideology is the trampling of the human right to conscience. This ideology will silence the prophetic word, the word of God who has a design and goal for his creation, a design that is opposed by sinul humanity. It will enthrone the desires of men, persecuting those who get in the way of their desires. 

     How should we respond to the power of ideology? The answer is not to be defensive, soleley focusing on making sure our rights to speak our conscience is not violated. Jesus said that the gates of hell will not stand against the church. Also, Jesus' great commission tells the church to go and teach the nations what Jesus  has thought. The church seems to be portrayed as on the offensive, moving towards the world, not protecting itself from the world.

   How does the church go on the offensive? Christians should proclaim the beauty of God's standards as a man opening the eyes of the blind. Christians should proclaim how God's standards keeps us safe from suffering (usually) and causing others to suffer. Christians should proclaim that God's grace covers sin, and that the more sin is acknowledged (not minimized), the greater the Grace of God becomes. In all our dialogue in the marketplace of ideas, we must lift up Christ with gentleness and respect, not treating our detractors as enemies to be conquered, but people whose hearts need to be won. When Jesus is lifted up, he will draw people to himself.    

     Working with kids have given me insight concerning wisdom. I was working one morning and it was time for the girls to prepare going to school. I was observing one of the girls who kept on coming out of her room without permssion. For background, in a residential facility, everything is done in an orderly way. The one who runs the routine will choose which order the children will get dressed, have breakfast, etc. Meanwhile, all other children has to wait in their rooms. This prevents kids from getting in each other's way, which could result in a fight.

    I confronted her and she responded that she needed to talk to a certain staff. I pointed out to her that it is not an excuse to just come out, that she has to raise her hands and get staff's attention first. What made this girl think that she can get away with coming out of her room without permission? I believe it is because staff gives her the benefit of the doubt and never checks out her story. She is banking on the fact that if a staff calls her out, then she can come out, and other staff will let her go. By the way, she was lying, I checked and nobody called her out. It made me say to myself, "this girl knows how to play the system."  

    A good working definition of wisdom is "working the system for your own good". What is a wise action depends on its relationship to the system. In a world where gaining money is the most important, wise actions are actions that would gain you more money. In the bible, it says that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. This is because the Lord is the ultimate source of blessing and curse. His blessing and curse is determined by how we stand in relation to his standard of good or bad. Therefore, wise actions are obedient to his commands, and foolish actions are disobedient to his commands.

     Many Christians judge movies only on the surface, judging the movies based on its having witches, vampires, werewolves, or having bad words or too much sex. With this criteria, "The Chronicles of Narnia" would be considered bad, even though it is written by a Christian and teaches the gospel- Aslan (Jesus) died, resurrected, and will win in the end, despite the struggle with the white witch. I am not saying that we should be willing to expose our minds to anything, but I suggest using movies to teach wisdom and foolishness to our children. Minds can be corrupted and that is why we need to talk to our children about what they put in their minds.

     The movie "Facing the Giants" is commended by most Christians because it glorifies Christ. However, there is something that bothers me about that movie. It is true that when we turn to Jesus, things will ultimately work out for our good, which is becoming more like Jesus. In this movie, the man got everything he wanted when he decided to trust that God will bless him where he is. It depicts God as a genie who will remove all the struggles in our lives if we turn to Jesus, even though the Christian life is a struggle for faith. Tyler Perry's movies are better at depicting this struggle. Look at the struggle for forgiveness in the movie "Diary of a Mad Black Woman".

     On the other hand "Harry Potter" a movie much maligned by some Christians for its occultic influences has some wisdom in it. As an aside, the books were good because J.K. Rowling is a great writer. I questioned at first whether her big books can keep my interest, but it did. It is safe to reveal that evil domination is defeated in the end. Another theme in this movie is the theme of love as greater than powerful magic. It was the love of Harry Potter's mother that saved him from death in the hands of the evil Voldermort. In the least, Harry Potter teaches that love conquers evil. 

     Whatever movie we focus on, parents could never forfeit their duty to communicate Godly wisdom and discernment to their children.      

     As we think about taxation, there are two extreme reactions that come to mind. One group welcomes it (even though others are affected negatively), thinking that they are "giving" to others when they give their money to the government to redistribute. The other group sees taxation as evil, the government redistributing money duly earned so that those who are not deserving can continue living irresponsibly.

     I propose a different attitude towards taxes. I believe that ideally, we are to take care of our families and our communities. This care is not meant to be impersonal. Caseworkers, representing the state, who come once a month to visit "orphaned" children could never be the ideal guardians for these children. Paid child-care workers and teachers, no matter how caring their hearts are, could never fill the role of a parent who is a stable presence in a child's life. Private citizens needs to take these "orphaned" children into their homes and give them the consistent care that would help them grow into loving and productive members of society. There are other areas where neighbors make decision that affect their neighbors, like in business (employers and employees) or in families (children and parents). Neighbors need to think about their neighbors when they make decisions. Ideally, the state should not be taking care of our responsibility as a society. 

     Unfortunately, because of the unwillingness or inability of private citizens to perform their duty towards their neighbors, the state, with its impersonal and inadequate service, must step in. It must take money from hard working people, some who also are having a hard time making ends meet, to provide services for others, some having legitimate needs and some who are taking advantage of the system. The government is a minister of God and taxation is a way that it executes its God-given role. Therefore, instead of railing against government taking our money and wasting it, or railing against it when our lives are not going well while praising it when our lives are going well, let us work with it in advancing the peace and prosperity of our cities. This is one way we honor authority.

     The state should also not have to take responsibility for our individual well-being. We are responsible for resisting substances that could damage our bodies, or for resisting activities that would destroy ourselves and our families. Let us be a society of individuals who have been given authority over creation, including our bodies. Creation is all our responsibily, not just the government's.  

     One passage in scriptures that have puzzled me is the one concerning a slave girl who was following Paul around proclaiming that Paul is proclaiming the way to be saved (some say that she actually said "a way to be saved" not "the way to be saved" and therefore not the Christian message, but notice that Paul did not immediately stop her, plus it is doubtful that the woman's message was that Paul's way of salvation is just one way among many, considering her zeal). Her message was Christian (Jesus is the only way to salvation) but the apostle Paul got annoyed, turned around, and drove out the demon from this slave girl.

     What puzzled me is that this girl seems to be a zealous follower of Paul, and therefore a follower of his message of salvation. Paul did not just tell this girl to keep quiet and stop distracting him, but he cast out a demon from her. It makes me ask the question, could there be among those who are proclaiming that Jesus saved them, those who are not really followers of Jesus? This question made me think of the altar calls that many pastors engage in, where they ask the those in the congregation to come forward if they want to pray to receive Jesus. Those who prayed the prayer, they would consider at that moment to be Christians. I have several problems with the identification of conversion with this crisis experience, where a person is brought to a point of praying to receive Jesus.

 1. When the Spirit came upon the apostles and they preached the Gospel that Jesus is the Messiah and he proved this by his resurrection, a community of believers was formed. Notice that those who believed the gospel became part of a community that proclaimed faith in Jesus and placed themselves under the apostles' teaching. They became disciples, individuals living the Christian life in community. 

2. Those who emphasize the crisis experience (many evangelicals) usually are suspicious of "Christians" in churches that don't have a focus on the crisis experience (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and mainline protestant churches). As a chaplain, I've witnessed great faith in Jesus from those who don't focus on crisis experiences, like Assyrian Catholics. Their zeal for Jesus would put some evangelicals to shame, but to their loss, many evangelicals would suspect these Assyrian Catholics to not be real Christians. This is because they may not have prayed to receive Jesus in their hearts. This is a divisive attitude, when Christians should be united, at least in spirit.

3. On the other hand, there is a benefit of the doubt given to "Christians" who have prayed the prayer that is unwarranted.  Some of these "Christians" could be going to fortunetellers or calling God the universe, which indicates an unChristian worldview. Some of these "Christians" may not have a great understanding of the grace of God. This could be indicated by their alienation from people in their lives, or their penchant for pushing people away. A "Christianity" devoid of grace is nominal Christianity. To consider a hateful person a Christian brother because he prayed the prayer gives him a false assurance.

How can we preserve God's grace towards sinners while at the same time upholding God's truth. I believe we should see the Christian life as a journey with God, beginning at birth. What I mean is that God is molding a person, using a Christian upbringing and/or through life experiences, to be fit for his presence. The crisis experience would then not be the beginning of the journey but one of several points in the journey when a person becomes aware of God as he revealed himself in Jesus. Everyone in this journey is growing in apprehending the Christian worldview and the grace of God in their lives. The Christian's journey consists of a series of repentances, where a person's heart and mind are transformed, and his affection for God in Jesus is increased while other affections decrease. That growth is manifested in the person's thinking, his attitudes, and his actions. The person who is focused on his happiness becomes more focused on other people's happiness, for example. In this journey paradigm, we may give a person who claims to be a Christian the benefit of the doubt, and challenge him to grow in the knowledge of God and his grace. This is discipleship, spreading the knowledge of God and his grace as waters cover the seas. Evangelism is a form of discipleship also for Christians.  

The end of this journey is not the person's reaching a state of perfection but the apprehension of God's face in death or in Jesus' second coming. In the end of this journey, the Christian will hear God say "Well done good and faithful servant."  Soli Deo Gloria

     Recently, I had a change of heart about a certain issue. Parenting books I have been reading emphasized the importance of immediate obedience. I understand where they are coming from, that children need to learn obedience because they always have to obey authorities. However, I struggled with this idea because of images of a drill instructor barking orders at scared recruits. I saw that as disrespectful to children because we would not think of talking to adults this way.

     However, some event at my work made me realize the importance of the idea of immediate obedience. Here is what happened. Part of my work is taking kids to doctor's appointments. One day I took a kid to his Doctor's appointment and I told him to go see the doctor now. At that moment, that kid was listening to some music. The kid told me to wait. Since I was lenient about kids obeying immediately, I allowed this kid to keep listening to his music. The kid must have made the doctor wait for five minutes, and honestly the doctor was not completely ready either so I did not bother to really make this child hurry.

     Besides my leniency, what gave this kid the idea to make the doctor, who could have been really busy, wait for five minutes? I believe now that making others wait is a sign of selfishness and it needs to be addressed. Like this kid, we sometimes get so focused on our agenda that we do not honor the one asking help from us. Don't get me wrong, I still believe that we shoud not talk to kids in such a way that they are disrespected, in a way that we would never talk to adults. However, I believe strongly now that this behavior of making others wait, by ignoring or just continually saying "wait" needs to be addressed. We and our kids need to develop the virtue of cooperation, we need to develop the heart habit of wanting to be of assistance to others, whoever they are and within reason. What would a cooperative person do when asked to do something? He would either stop what he is doing and help with a cheerful disposition (not reluctantly), or ask if he could help later, and then accept a person's no, help is needed at the moment.

     Some may think that this is a mundane issue but understanding the virtue of cooperation will shed light on some issues we Christians deal with. There is a question I heard from a Christian radio station that I used to think about, whether Christians can work alongside atheists or not, for example, in building houses for the homeless. Some Christians see it as a good way to have conversations with atheists about Christianity. Some will say no, that it is not right to do anything with unbelievers. I have some thoughts in this matter.

1. I believe we sometimes overanalyze an issue. The bottom line is some people need houses and this is an opportunity to build houses for them. Helping people is a virtue and God definitely wants us to be virtuous. Jesus healed people just because he has compassion on them and we need to be compassionate too. Therefore, if a group of Christians want to build houses, then good for them, even if those with the equipment are atheists. God blessed the work of Joseph even though he is working for a gentile Pharaoh in helping the Egyptians through a time of famine. Anyway, in the workforce, we always work wih those who do not share our beliefs. Is cooperation a necessary virtue in the workplace? You bet, and God wants us to be cooperative too and have a good reputation.

2. The thought of helping people or working side by side with people for the sake of evangelism is not right. We should not help people and work with them for an ulterior motive. A good work ethic- doing good work for people for its own sake, is a virtue that we need to develop and virtue should be an end in itself. Jesus healed both those who believed in him and those who did not. Don't get me wrong, I believe it is important to share our faith. However, sharing the hope that is in us should be part of our conversations as we build relationships with people. Just as we may talk about our work, we should also be talking about why we work hard and why we help people. It is because God gave us a compassionate heart, the heart of Jesus.

3. Although it is good to help people, we should always remember that the only one who could really give us peace is the Lord Jesus Christ. Having houses for people may help them live better lives, but the life that would give peace is a life lived with Jesus. Whether we are involved with a diaconal Christian ministry or a secular service organization, we should do our best to be in relationship with people because it is in relationships, not in food distribution or work programs, that souls find healing. The healed soul is one that finds peace with God through Jesus. 

The bottom line is to love our neighbors by caring for them in anyway we have been given an opportunity to.  

     Although I have great respect for most Christian leaders, there is a statement they make that have bothered me. This statement is "Christianity is not a religion, its a relationship." I have reflected on why this bothered me and I have pinpointed the reasons.

1. The statement is simply inaccurate about its view of religion. Although "religion" is somewhat a nebulous term, it can be said that religion is man's way of connecting to a power/s that somehow influences his destiny. It is a natural response to the mystery of this power/s. Just as people fall in love, they formulate a religion. To judge it as bad would be tantamount to saying falling in love is bad. Some may avoid falling in love, but its part of a person's makeup to fall in love.

2. When some Christian leaders separate Christianity from the term religion, they are basically saying that Christianity is not about becoming good enough to become acceptable to God, but about having a relationship with Jesus. That may be true but there are several things wrong with that thought. It is true that religion could be works-centered, but religion does not have to be. As an example, the Hare Krishnas are an example of a religion focused on devotion to Krishna. Christianity is about devotion to Jesus. Christians are devotees of Jesus. Some Buddhists believe that only through the grace of Amida Buddha can a person find enlightenment (their goal is not being acceptable to "God" which points to the error of the thought that religion is about being acceptable to God). This belief is similar to the Christian belief that only through the grace of God in Jesus can a person be made acceptable to God. Some may argue that Christianity influenced this group of buddhists but that is debatable. A word about works-centeredness. For valid reasons, people are uneasy with the thought that a profession of faith is enough for "salvation" however that is conceived. That is why elaborate works systems (rituals and/or ethics) are added to the original confession of faith as a standard for "salvation". For example, Muslim scholars debate whether the confession "Allah is the only God and Muhammad is his prophet" is enough to make a person a Muslim, or are there works that accompany a good Muslim. 

3. There is a third reason that this well-meaning Christian leaders are probably not completely aware of. In their zeal to assure people that being a Christian is not about being religious, these Christian leaders have accommodated themselves to a bad attitude among many people in this culture. When some people hear religion, they hear "Priests" telling them what is right and wrong. Many people today are anti-authoritarian, whether that authority are church leaders or a set of convictions. This is shown by people avoiding the organized church or telling themselves that it is okay to believe whatever they want to believe. Some may have bad experiences with church, but I believe that some people just want to be able to do what they want to do, without the input of any authority or community. Their God is their desires. Therefore, I appeal to Christian leaders not to feed into the anti-authoritarian individualism that has pervaded society and respect the organized Church and the Church fathers who have contended for the faith once for all delivered to the saints.