THE YOUNG BOYS OF SUMMER - July 19, 2011

This week I am traveling back in time.  In my mind I am going back   sixty years—to the summer of 1950 or perhaps 1951 (it has been a long time, so I may be a little fuzzy on the exact year, but not the event I want to describe). 

I am 12 or 13 years old, living in a "Mayberry"-type town—DeFuniak Springs, Florida.  The summers are long and slow and hot.  Several boys my age love the game of baseball, as do I.  But there are no organized summer sports in DFS, only rag-tag, sandlot baseball, played among ourselves for the sheer fun of the game. Our "uniforms" are blue jeans (dungarees) or khaki pants (rolled up two or three "turns" from the ends of the legs), tee shirts, and high top black tennis shoes.  Mr. Fred Hackett, who teaches Industrial Arts (Shop) in the local Junior High School, has an interest in us, and most mornings he will walk from his home to Harbeson Field to coach us.  (I don't think Mr. Hackett ever owned a car.  Wherever he went in town, he always walked).  Occasionally, he is able to schedule a game with other teams in Bonifay or Crestview or Valparaiso or some other town within thirty or forty miles of home.  Mr. Hackett is always able to arrange to get a school bus for our transportation.

The boys on the team range in age from 10 to l4.  Some are better athletes than others, but we all love the game.  Out of my memory, and in no particular order, here is a partial roster of players (all of them school mates): David (Bunny) Bloodworth, John Frank (Jack) Bloodworth, Jr., Larry Danley, Charles Carlin, Adrian Rivard, Ralph Cobb, Tommy McCall, Ben Randall Shelton, Clinton Rhodes, Ross Nowling, Jimmy Stewart, Sherrill Balcomb, Charles Marsh, Royce Bonds, as well as others.

On this particular day we have gone toValparaiso to play.  Jack Bloodworth is usually the catcher, but he is a fine athlete, capable of playing other positions.  Perhaps because we have a good lead on the other team, during the game Mr. Hackett moves Jack to third base and inserts Ross Nowling behind the plate.  Like me, Ross doesn't get to play all that much and he is thrilled to get into the game.  He is a strong, stocky kid.  Somewhere late in the game Ross comes up to bat.  The opposing pitcher throws him a "straight" (fast) ball.  Ross, either luckily or otherwise, catches the pitch on the fat of the bat and drives it far over the center fielder's head and circles the bases for a homerun!  He is ecstatic as he crosses home plate!  So are the rest of us.  It is Ross' moment of glory, a time when a sub becomes the hero.

Why do I remember Ross' homerun?  Why do I remember his jubilation?  Why do I remember the young boys of summer? Why do I remember Mr. Hackett?  I don't know.  Probably it was because  we were having so much fun.  Possibly it was because we were learning some lessons about life, though at the time we were not aware of learning anything other than trying to become better baseball players.

Mr. Hackett has been dead a long time.  I do not know where the young boys of summer are today.  A few, I know, are deceased.  One of them, I understand, made it to the lower minor leagues.  One became a District Attorney in south Florida.  One followed his dad in becoming an educator and coach.  Another became a medical doctor.  I became a preacher.

That was all a long time ago in a world that bears little resemblance to the world I live in today.  Our world has gained much in the last sixty years.  But I am afraid we have lost some things along the way that likely will never be regained.  Yet I am hopeful, because all across America we still have the young boys of summer.

Hugh Fulford

July 19, 2011

SPIRITUALITY - 7/12/11

SPIRITUALITY

Today I am hearing more and more about being "spiritual but not religious." Recently an event—a Moonlight Festival at Nashville's Center of Symmetry—was held that "was aimed at the spiritual but not religious crowd—people who want to explore alternative ways to connect with God" (The [Nashville] Tennessean, June 27, 2011). Such events as the newspaper went on to describe made me to wonder if people really understand what spirituality is.   

A little over thirty years ago, Dr. James O. Baird, then Chancellor of Oklahoma Christian University, gave a speech at the Fort Worth Lectures titled, "What Does it Mean to Be Spiritual?"  Dr. Baird began by telling of a woman who divided a congregation of the Lord's people because of her charismatic (Pentecostal) teachings. In spite of her divisive doctrines she was described as "mistaken but very spiritual." Baird also told of a young couple who forsook the Lord's church and attached themselves to a tambourine shaking, guitar playing, body swaying, hand-clapping, and so-called "tongue-speaking group."  When asked the reason for their change, they said, "We wanted something more spiritual." Incidents such as these cause a thoughtful person to wonder if such people have ever given the slightest attention to what the New Testament says about spirituality.  My observation is that such people as those described by Dr. Baird and those who attended the Moonlight Festival at Nashville's Center of Symmetry are not really concerned with what God has revealed in His word about the true meaning of spirituality, but only about their own subjective views of the matter.

My experience with people who profess to be "spiritual but not religious" shows them to be people who have very little interest in meeting with Christians to worship God "in spirit and truth" (John 4:24).  Such people are bored with what they label "traditional church services."  The singing of "psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" (Colossians 3:16) in a worship assembly, engaging in corporate prayer directed to the Heavenly Father, communing with Christ in the observance of His Supper, hearing a message from the word of God, and giving a monetary contribution to the Cause of the Lord does not appeal to such so-called "spiritual but not religious" folks!  They can "experience God" through tarot readings, lighting candles, burning incense, attending workshops on spiritual healing, working in their garden, being out on the golf course or on the lake or up in the mountains, or just "chilling out" at home! Never mind the command, "And let us consider one another so as to stir up to love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching" (Hebrews 10:24-25).  I do not know how a Christian thinks he/she can be "spiritual" while ignoring this instruction.

Over fifty years ago, E. W. McMillan wrote a book titled The Minister's Spiritual Life.  I obtained and read brother McMillan's book. I found the material to be extremely helpful in understanding the proper, biblical concept of spirituality.   I found it beneficial for me as a person striving to develop the spirituality that God requires of all His children.  Among the topics discussed were: "The Minister's Spiritual Life," "Spirituality Toward God," "Roots Which Feed Spirituality," and "Am I Spiritual."  Among the matters brother Mac emphasized was the fact that true spirituality: 1) Is greatly concerned about right attitudes and motives, 2) places more emphasis on the eternal than on the temporal, and 3) is more interested in the ultimate than in the immediate.

I would challenge all of us to a sense of urgency for developing a truly spiritual life. Let us sincerely "hunger and thirst for righteousness" (Matthew 5:6).  May we come to understand that spirituality cannot be developed apart from the true teaching of Christ, apart from the church, and apart from the regular and faithful assembling with other Christians to worship God "in spirit and truth" (John 4:24).

Hugh Fulford   

July 12, 2011

God and Andy Rooney

Several years ago I read Andy Rooney's book, Sincerely, Andy Rooney.  Rooney is a nationally known writer and a commentator on the CBS program “Sixty Minutes.”  His book is a series of letters written over the years to various people on a wide variety of topics.  Rooney is insightful, cryptic, often caustic, and occasionally humorous in what he writes. Overall, the book made for interesting reading.  His last chapter, a letter to his children regarding his views on religion, however, demonstrated a remarkable lack of “brain power” which he nevertheless had touted throughout the chapter as being what he had used to come to his agnostic viewpoint.  (Mr. Rooney and I exchanged at least one round of letters regarding his views).

Early in his letter Rooney made this observation: “How this Earth and all the life on it came about is, so far, beyond anyone’s ability to understand but it seems wrong to stop trying by saying simply that ‘it’s the work of God.’  Even if you think God created it, you haven’t finished answering the question because you have to follow it up by asking ‘Then who created God?’”  “Brain power” would help Rooney to understand that “from nothing comes nothing.”  But, something is, therefore, something has always been.  Unless nothing got busy and created something, then something has always existed!  What is that something—mindless matter or intelligent life?  Since Rooney (and all other humans) have intelligence and life, which is more reasonable to believe—that intelligent life came from eternally existing matter or eternally existing life?  If matter is what has always existed then at what point did some matter begin evolving into life? Had Rooney been there as a cosmic observer, could he have pinpointed the moment at which lifeless matter began to exhibit characteristics of life?

Every effect must have a cause and the cause must be sufficient to produce the effect.  However, there cannot be an endless series of effects and causes because at some point one must get back to the one great original cause.  For Rooney to say you have to ask, “Who created God?” is to ask the question of a five year old child who has not yet learned to reason back to an original First Cause.  It is to ignore the self-evident truth that one cannot have an endless series of effects and causes…that at some point one must get back to the eternally existing, ultimately originating cause of all things. What is that one great originating cause?

Though the Bible is not regarded by Rooney as divinely inspired of God (whose existence he doubts), he nevertheless should be willing to listen to an explanation for the origin of all things that is far more rational than his.  “In the beginning (the original starting point of time, hf), was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  He was in the beginning with God.  All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.  In Him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:1-4, NKJV). Observe that this great creative power had life existing within Himself, and thus was capable of creating other life.  The same Biblical writer later said, “We have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us” (I John 1:2).  Thus, this great originating cause had within Him eternal life, that is, He did not have a beginning (when the beginning began, He was already there,  John 1:1-2), and was capable of producing all other life. 

“Brain power” tells me this is reasonable, much more so than to think that mindless matter somehow produced intelligent life forms on this earth.

Hugh Fulford

July 5, 2011