The Gospel According To FedEx ®

It’s plastered on all of their vehicles, containers and literature. Their executives have committed to it as a corporate mission and their people, from managers to drivers, from loaders to couriers, make it their daily objective. Simple and easy to understand, it defines their purpose. They have reduced everything they believe, everything they have and everything they do to this one statement. It is their gospel.

“The World On Time.” That’s it.

FedEx pledges to ship products from one point to another, anywhere in the world, at the precise time they agree to do it, or sooner. They dedicate all the resources of their vast assemblage of jets, trucks and distribution centers to this simple mission. Hordes of purple and orange uniformed associates scurry around our neighborhoods and crisscross the globe to get the job done. Clusters of corporate executives meet from early to late in far-flung office buildings devising ways to reach this singular goal more effectively.

Little else matters if they don’t deliver their packages on time. Failure means that their competition would soon overwhelm them, and customer disaffection would soon erode their client lists. If they don’t reach the world, then they are of no value to many of their clients who must have their good shipped to out-of-the-way places on the other side of the world. If they do reach the world, but don’t get there on time, they may as well forget it. Many products lose their value if they are not delivered at exact times.

In a way, it’s too bad that FedEx had to be the one to invent this statement. If anyone should commit to such a goal as, “The World On Time,” it ought to be the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. No product in the world surpasses His gospel in importance and urgency.

The World. Jesus, the Lamb that takes away the sins of the world, did not shrink the scope of his mission to fit only his family, his nation or his race. Emanating from earth’s highest mountain, the waves of his redemptive blood surged ever outward in concentric circles until they included the most remote geographical areas of the planet, and offered salvation to the most unlikely and undeserving human beings among us. If, out of one blood, he made all the nations, then, through one blood, he wants to save all nations. So must our mission match his vision. If our founder’s vision embraced the world of the first century, who are we to impose limitations on the church’s mission twenty centuries later? Petty prejudices or myopic mentalities must not whittle the grand intentions of the Savior down to a fraction of their original design.

The church today must continually reassess and relentlessly pursue its purpose in global terms. Novel trends often seize our imaginations, and, before we know it, we charge off in some purely human direction. Personal agendas sabotage our ordained purpose. Multiple wants and perceived needs draw us into lesser missions. Many of these missions boast noble and attractive results, but they turn out to be mere distractions. After all is said and done, we still have a world to reach. Should FedEx proclaim a vision bigger than that of the church?

On Time. The best product in the world loses its potency if it arrives at its destination too late. While the church may eventually rise to their worldwide challenge, we cannot forget the expiring time. The importance of the gospel lies not only in the efficacious blood of Jesus, but also in the urgency of the need. In John 4:35, Jesus said, “Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest.” We have a world of people to reach—-now! Jesus himself set forth this time constraint, and we dare not dismiss it as irrelevant. Notwithstanding the claims of the predestination doctrine, the denial of the historicists, the whitewashing of the multicultural movement or the abdication of post-modern Christianity, the church still has an urgency driving its mission. If we don’t get there on time, others with a lesser gospel will. If we don’t get there on time, even the greatest message in the world cannot save a single soul. A too late gospel equals no gospel at all.

We must commit the resources of the church to reaching this simple goal. Our worldwide network of ministers and people, churches and districts, ministries and programs need to work to make it happen. No objective or mission we presently own eclipses this one in importance—-today, or ever. In the world of package delivery, FedEx may reach The World On Time. In the world of propagating the true gospel, it is the church that must answer the call.

Paschal’s Wager

“We toss the coin, but it is the Lord who controls its decision.” Proverbs 16:33 TLB

Our scientific age has schooled us to run calculations for every venture. The stock market, financial investments, business ventures and insurance policies are all predicated upon calculated risks. People enter sweepstakes, compete on game shows, bet on sports contests and play the lottery against impossible odds, all in the illusory quest for huge sums of money. Odds-making finds its way into nearly every aspect of life. Doctors inform patients as to the percentage of a surgery’s success and the chances of side effects from medications. Lawyers impress upon their clients the probability of winning a case. Geologists measure the likelihood of earthquakes and meteorologists forecast the chances of rain or snow.

Blaise Paschal, a brilliant mathematician who reached his prime in 1650, posed this stark conundrum to his colleagues in an effort to apply the new field of probability to matters of faith: “Either God is, or he is not. Which way should we incline? Reason cannot answer.” In other words, if we were to wager the existence of God, how would we stand? The conclusion he reached over three centuries ago remains instructive for us today.

According to Paschal, two questions demand an answer before anyone can decide whether to believe in God. First, what are the odds of being right? Second, and more importantly, what are the consequences of being wrong? The answer to the first question is simple: The odds are one out of two, or fifty-fifty. The second answer is far more crucial. If one says there is no God and he is wrong, he reaps eternal damnation. “Which way should we incline?” Such severe consequences heavily outweigh the most enticing odds. For Paschal, a deeply religious man, the only sensible answer was yes.

The willingness to take a chance varies according to the consequences. People will take long shots if losing means little or nothing. The higher the stakes grow, however, the more conservative they become. No thrill, even for the inveterate gambler, compensates for total loss. Despite these caveats, many fail to read the numbers accurately. Others are driven by rash and reckless behavior.

Just as the Roman soldiers gambled for Jesus’ robe, many impulsive souls today think that accepting or rejecting God rides on a mere roll of the dice. They place everything in this life, and the life to come, on the table, hoping that “Lady Luck” smiles on them. The tragic truth about Paschal’s wager is that there is no wager at all. Perhaps God is a fair bet in the minds of statisticians, probability experts and gamers. But the believer rejects even the premise itself.

Don’t gamble on God. The Bible says, “He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” (Hebrews 11:6). The gambler begins with uncertainty, but the believer begins with faith. The gambler hedges his bet, but the believer casts all his lot with God.

Don’t gamble on your soul. In the parable of the rich man who built more barns, God said, “…This night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? (Luke 12:20). A modern advertiser coined the phrase that “a mind is a terrible thing to waste”, but the eternal soul is a far more terrible thing to lose.

Don’t gamble on the rapture. “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation…The Lord is not slack concerning his promise…but the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night.” (II Peter 3:3-4, 10.) With the fulfillment of scores of Bible prophecies, many of them in our generation, we have every reason to expect the imminent rapture of the church.

Don’t gamble on the judgment . Hebrews 9:27 says, “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.” Many people today to whatever they can to wiggle through every loophole and out of every commitment that they possibly can.

“The fool hath said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” Psalm 14:1. God is not a gamble. The conclusions of atheists and agnostics find their basis not in statistics or probabilities, not in convoluted claims of superior logic, not in their finite experiences, but in folly. “For I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. II Timothy 1:12.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Growth trajectories often take off in directions that baffle even the experts. Who can predict what will work, or when the right elements will come together to produce a spiritual explosion? The concepts of reaching the lost, making disciples and mothering churches resist easy and painless human analysis. Nevertheless, it is time for us to step back, gather our senses and envision our next launch.

Plenty of ideas are out there. “The customer is king”, some believe, even in the church. Recently, a church marquee I saw fawned “All our seats have first class service.” Others insist that we “do the demographics.” Advertising blitzes, image re-casting, reworked strategies, media innovations, organizational shake-ups, extreme service makeovers, small group start-ups, redesigned logos, literature with pizzazz, group targeting, shifting meeting times and a thousand other changes, from massive to minute, capture our imagination today. Something—-anything—-needs to be done to get us moving.

All of these things work. None of these things work. Some did, and now don’t. Some didn’t, and now do. Admittedly, I am not being too helpful here. The point is that we need to fish for the right strategy that will work for each situation and it may not come through analysis. It will come via the biblical model of seeking the face of God through prayer, and then getting out there to start sowing the seed. When we don’t know what will work, we must rely on the conviction that something will work. The sower in the parable was not held responsible for the soil on which he sowed the seed, even though much of it landed on hard, stony and parched ground. His job was to broadcast the seed, so that’s what he did. He knew that a crop was never harvested that did not first begin with the planting season. Planting methods aside, the basic cycle of life remains unchanged from the dawn of creation.

The United Pentecostal Church , International looks toward a future alive with prospects of phenomenal growth. New fields of ethnic, social, economic and geographic differences continually break open to the same seed sown two thousand years ago. New methods of planting guarantee wider coverage; new ways of harvesting lead to greater retention; new plans for discipleship strengthen converts; new technologies make all of them hugely more effective. All of them beg to be implemented today.

First, where are we now? Our inventory fact sheet is impressive. It includes physical assets, a publishing house, a trained army of evangelists and crusaders, an array of pastors and churches, scores of Apostolic publications, Bible colleges, a seminary, campgrounds, conferences, developed ministries and leaders in place. Yet, as important as these assets are, one thing supercedes them all—-an all-consuming desire to reach the world and change it. That desire fueled the efforts of the first church and they succeeded in their mission without the considerable advantages our modern age has given us. We grossly err if we engage in tweaking and embellishing our vast holdings as though they existed for our pleasure. God did not give us what we have today to wallow in self-entertainment, but to totally invest it into his divine purpose—-seeking and saving the lost. If we only concern ourselves with hard drive upgrades and choosing new color schemes, we may well end up missing the planting season.

Where do we go from here? Four paths lead out from this question: where, we, go and here. We need to know where to go. We need unity in our efforts so we do not waste or cancel out our resources. We need a plan of action that gets the job done. We need to bring our entire present physical and spiritual capabilities to bear on the challenge.

1. We need to know where to go. The sheer number of people in the world today obliges us to reach a new level of growth. Some of us can go by mass evangelism, others by local revivals and home Bible studies, still others by one soul at a time. The one thing we must not do is mire down in the status quo or in negative energy drains. Jesus said to go the highways (public arenas) and hedges (private settings) to bring them in.

2. We need each other. A hokey cliché? No. Withdrawing into isolationism or retreating into the smug comfort of a few cronies runs counter to accomplishing the bigger task before us. No one needs much help to do a small job; tackling the big job, however, calls for many hands and great cooperation. Those who see the global need understand that the church cannot back down into a cozy little enclave. We need massive forces working in concert to get to the future where we belong.

3. We need to act. Don’t spend so much time figuring out what to do that you have no time to do it. Better to try and fail at a half dozen strategies before finding out the right one than to interminably pore over the possibilities but never get started. Go, go, go!

4. We must go from here with what we have. We are who we are and we have what we have. Understand it, accept it and get over it. The future has a starting point. This is it and we are the ones.

Body Language

Body language experts contend that we are much more likely to discover a person’s true feelings by studying non-verbal communication than to listen to the words he or she may speak. Corporations hire people who specialize in “reading” a prospective employee’s facial expressions, arm and leg movement, involuntary actions, nervous twitches and even choice of clothing. In the past few decades, psychologists have made much of dreams, paintings, inkblots and exercises involving shapes, sizes and colors. Lie detector tests focus on physiological reactions given by people who are asked certain questions, not on their verbal responses. All of these things signify the importance of actions and symbols without words.

Unfortunately, word lovers like me have a bias toward words. I actually like dictionaries, lexicons, encyclopedias and other tools of the trade. I have some idiolectic (sorry!) rules of thumb that I use to justify my word choices. At the same time, I realize that words do not begin to cover the entire spectrum of communication. In fact, our actions exert a far more powerful and meaningful effect on us than the most articulate and precise words we could possibly use.

Words often negate clarity or truth. Of politicians’ calculated word choices, Mona Charen, columnist writes, “After the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia in 1996, Mr. Clinton had Dick Morris take a poll. ‘We tested peacemaker or toughness,’ Mr. York quotes Mr. Morris as recalling. The public preferred toughness. ‘So Clinton talked tough.’ But the FBI director, Louis Freeh, became so exasperated by Mr. Clinton’s failure to raise the matter with Saudi officials that he actually asked former President George Bush to do so instead.”

Human interaction has never been limited to words alone. An amazing number of signals and ideas can be transmitted from one person to another with nary a word being spoken. Were this not the case, the realms of art and music would be desolate, indeed. When it comes to emotions, we actually rely on body language to convey our feelings more than words. Complex or intellectual thoughts may need words to express fully, but even these use a complementary pattern of gestures and unspoken movements to provide emphasis and guidance to the conversation. Here is a sampling of non-verbal actions:

• Eyes : Staring. Narrowing. Rolling. Closing. Glancing.
• Voice : Laughter. A sound. A cough.
• Body : A hug. Raising the arms. Leaping. Dancing. Running. Bumping.
• Hands : Pointing. A handshake. Clapping the hands. High fives. Gesturing.
• Mouth : Smiling. Frowning. Kissing. Whistling.
• Clothing : Colors. Uniforms. Certain articles of clothing.
• Head : Nodding. Shaking. Tilting. A haircut.
• Face : Distorting. Turning away. Looking up or down.
• Signs : Tattoos. Ornamentation. A gift. Insignias.
• One’s self : One’s presence or absence. Stepping forward. Standing back.
• Actions : Owning a certain model of car. Swerving. Pointing a gun. Brandishing a knife.

While the spoken word remains a central aspect of the power of God, we must also recognize that he communicated many things without words. In Genesis, God made coats of skins for Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness. This is a profound statement of divine intention. Even if there were no subsequent words to explain God’s act, the imagery of slaying and bloodshed itself would suffice to depict God’s assessment of sin. The rite of circumcision, Jacob’s wrestling match, the burning bush, pillars of cloud and fire, Aaron’s rod that budded, the Urim and Thummim, the tabernacle plan, the sacerdotal rituals and other actions that God did or commanded to be done show the importance of meanings in absence of words.

Going further, Samson’s uncut locks of hair, judges giving a white or black stone, saluting and bowing to officials, ceremonial gift-giving, kisses, foods, preparation of meals, style and material for clothing, observation of days and time-periods, kinds of sacrifices and a host of other symbols were all used for various reasons in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, we see baptism in water by immersion, washing of feet, the communion supper, breaking of bread, anointing the sick with oil, fasting, giving of alms, and other sacraments or forms of service that had great meaning attached to them. The Bible overflows with non-verbal images.

Without question then, non-verbal expressions in Bible practice were an important way to communicate thoughts, feelings and information to others. It is very instructive, the, to place this concept into the context of a Christian lifestyle as taught in the scriptures. For example, when someone declares that the wearing of long hair for women has no significance, he or she denies the reality of non-verbal communication. A woman’s long hair symbolizes a number of important concepts: submission to authority, distinction from the male gender, acceptance of a God-given role and a display of feminine glory. Likewise, when a woman’s hair was shorn, it was considered a mark of shame before the community.

Other non-verbal practices in the New Testament demonstrate this fact as well. Sexual relationships outside the bonds of marriage defined a person as corrupt. Killing, stealing, idolatry, eating meat offered to idols and drinking blood were all condemned. On the positive side, many actions were encouraged because they underscored righteous living and understanding. Faithful attendance to duty, working with one’s own hands, giving in offerings, paying tithes, attending church, and many other things were practiced by the early believers. These were just as important as their verbal confessions of faith because they represented the inner-workings of the heart.

Apostolic men and women bear noticeable distinctions from the general public in the way they dress and behave. Strangers often approach us and ask about our appearance or want to confirm their opinions about the church we attend. At large gatherings such as General Conference, we hear and read comments by the local population about what they see in our people. And well they should. It seems logical to conclude that a conversion experience as radical as the new birth should make a profound difference in every aspect of a person’s life, including their appearance, behavior and spirit.

Should anyone say that the gospel of grace pertains only to matters of faith and heart, and not to any outward manifestation, nearly every book in the New Testament stands in objection. Two representative selections are Romans 12:1: “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.” Also, I Corinthians 6:19-20 says, “What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.” Scriptural terms such as modest apparel, shamefacedness, appearance of evil, and others give attention to non-verbal communication. Many corroborative verses can be cited, but all of them underscore the fact that genuine faith has a decided effect upon our behavior, our appearance and the way we present ourselves in the world.

Certain non-verbal forms of communication send a wrong message because of the cultural milieu. Some societies take offense at particular gestures, types of clothing, actions, and etc. because their traditions forbid them. We do not have to be raised in a certain culture, however, to develop a conscience about particular practices. When we read in the Bible about the things God blesses or curses, when we study the original Apostolic church and learn what it considered right and wrong, good and bad, we then have an obligation to assimilate those things into our own lifestyle, regardless of the culture.

It is very difficult to say one thing and do another. For example, try shaking your head and saying “yes”, or nodding your head and saying “no”. If you concentrate, you might do it, otherwise, it’s hard to do. Those who interpret body language say that despite a person’s words, actions, most of which are involuntary, convey his or her actual meaning, mood and intent. In the church, when a man says, “I am living a holy life,” and then gets drunk, philanders, and steals from his employer, his body language clearly contradicts his verbal messages. If a woman avows that she is pure and chaste, and then dresses like a prostitute and is frequently seen with different men at all hours of the night, what are we to conclude but that her claims are bogus? Actions verify words, not vice versa. Incidentally, the term to use for people who use words to cover up their actions is lying. No one needs resort to torrents of verbiage to convey a sense of godliness. If they would only act the part, many words would be unnecessary.

The Apostolic church of the twenty-first century must not buy into old heresies disguised as new truths. The more faith gets pushed out from reality into the haze of sham, smoke and mirrors, the more we risk losing it all. Righteousness that is not really righteous eventually destroys its own meaning. Holiness that is not truly holy will soon become farcical. Truth that answers to a hundred different names will not know what to call itself. Jesus said, “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” Truth that exists in word only will lead to freedom that is word only. Only truth that encompasses body, soul and spirit will make one truly free.

Governmentium (Gv )

On the scientific front, research scientists have discovered a new pervasive element in the periodic table: governmentium (Gv). It possesses unusual properties which make it markedly different from other elements. They say it is the heaviest element known to science, and its greatest concentration seems to be the geographical area of Washington D. C., although many states have detected pockets of the element near the center of each state.

Governmentium consists of one neutron, 125 deputy neutrons, 75 supervisory neutrons, held together by a force called morons, and surrounded by vast quantities of peons. It has a somewhat unstable nature and tends to grow heavier in two, four and six year cycles, mysteriously coinciding with U. S. Congressional, Presidential and Senatorial elections. Some researchers have expressed concern that governmentium could develop into a menace to society, but their fears have been largely denied by those who work with it on a daily basis and who have charged its detractors with engaging in science fiction scare tactics reminiscent of the “Star Wars” fiasco. Presently, the main use for Gv involves the manufacture of sedatives and hallucinogens, although it has been know to incite amphetamine, deoxyephedrine, and methamphetamine type responses. Consumers cite feelings of pleasure, inability to work, a sense of irresponsibility and other sensations that relieve the stress and anxiety typical of normal, productive individuals.

Still, dubious scientists point to other areas of the earth where governmentium has been found in abundance and has caused problems. They say that the former U. S. S. R. suffered from an overdose of the element in its various forms and caused a major deterioration of the infrastructure of the now defunct empire. Supporters, on the other hand, claim that the failure of those pilot programs were the result of defective manufacturing and faulty application. They say that governmentium, if used correctly, can be the panacea for all human problems. Cuba , Venezuela , and the People’s Republic of China stand out as showcases of the drug’s success, according to backers.

The side effects of Gv consumption include amnesia, euphoria, loss of balance, loss of finance, inability to concentrate, incoherence, inability to speak freely, inability to defend oneself, difficulty in reading, difficulty in parenting, and other forms of personal and social impairment. The element has a strong predisposition to abuse.  Studies show that it is highly addictive and has been linked to various forms of dementia. Extended use can lead to becoming partially or totally institutionalized.

At the present, few guidelines have been set up to regulate the production and use of the new element. The only regulations written and enforced concerning governmentium are by government bureaucrats. Skeptics charge that the control must be placed back in the hands of the public, but, at this point, the move seems unlikely. Too many members of the population have developed an affinity for or a dependence upon Gv in order for a reversal of policy to succeed. Opponents suggest that the parasite-like characteristics of the element could eventually cause the host organism to collapse. Should that happen, it is uncertain whether or not the original state could ever be restored.

Is Gv a dangerous or a harmless drug? Is it the answer to all our problems or is it the source of our problems. The controversy continues to rage. In any case, it would seem prudent to use it sparingly and monitor it closely.

Let’s Pretend

Kids live in a make-believe world. A million Shaquille O’Neal’s slam-dunk mini-basketballs into hoops five feet off the ground. Little mommies snuggle life-like infants, karate kick-boxers mow down enemy hordes, and Indy 500 drivers careen through neighborhood sidewalks. It’s the pretend world.

Nothing goes wrong in this world. No one lies, cheats, steals or disappoints. Nobody gets hurt. Pretend world daddies always come home, mommies always kiss away the bumps and scrapes, and problems always get solved.

Adults leave this pretend existence behind and grow to embrace the real world—-right? Hardly. We would be shocked to know how many people hang onto ideas and impressions that are nothing short of elaborate coping schemes, with little basis in reality.

Consumers pretend that sex and violence, beer and liquor ads, and constant ridiculing of God and religious ideals on television do not hurt us or undermine our values.

Entertainment gluttons pretend that R-rated movies with their raw language, nudity, vulgarity, immoral plots and obscene humor are harmless.

Parents pretend that kids don’t lie, that adolescents are clueless about sexual intimacy and that teens are immune to peer pressure to drink beer, try drugs or commit immoral acts.

Some Christians pretend that church attendance, prayer, Bible-reading, spiritual conversation and quiet meditation on God lost their significance to us long ago.

Older people pretend that adult attitudes and interests have no effect on the kids, and that the younger generation will maintain faith in God even though their adult role models slip into a casual and careless kind of spiritual life.

The pretend world is always just right. A gentle breeze always blows, the climate hovers at a perfect temperature, roses have no thorns, insects don’t bite, no one speaks unkind words, enemies never seek to destroy us, and no devil tempts us. Trouble is, it just doesn’t exist. But, we keep on pretending.

My son, Ross loved horses as a little boy. Dozens of toy horses lined his room, and he always talked about going horseback riding. One summer, we put him on a live Shetland pony to ride around in circles. He hated it. He panicked and we had to get him off in a hurry. Real ponies scared him, but pretend ones didn’t.

Too many believe that the real world is too scary to deal with. We think that survival means returning to our pretend world where we can continue to believe things that are not true. This sounds alarmingly like the scripture found in II Thessalonians 2:9-12: “The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.” (NIV)

Can you imagine that? People will actually believe a lie! How? Could they become so used to living in a pretend world that they prefer it, even though it is obviously not according to truth? Is it possible that people who have actually heard about the anti-Christ will accept him anyway when he comes on the scene? Or, that they would know about the rapture, but will actually believe the explanations given by the world after it happens?

Too many believe that there is nothing they can do anyway. Give up. The world is what it is, and we are not going to change it. Learn to live with it. Yet, the scripture emphatically says, “The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.”

Too many believe that they don’t really have to give up—-just give in.”  In other words, they don’t intend to deny their faith. They just want to accommodate the radical changes that modern life has thrown at us. Now is the time, however, for us to “stand in the evil day.”

May I remind you that there is a real Jesus. He gave us a real gospel, he died a real death on a real cross. His blood, his tomb, his resurrection were real. He did this so we could have a real salvation from a real hell. The pretend bubble will not survive the coming storm. Living in denial results in catastrophic consequences.

If you’re still playing with toys and doll, put them away.  It’s time to get real.

Truths About Governments

The following pithy statements have been mistakenly attributed to Abraham Lincoln for many years.  Lincoln may have indeed believed them, but it was left to a man in a succeeding generation to spell them out in the form below.  Regardless of their origin, they bear reading and thinking about today.  The contemporary political dialogue that routinely rages in the public square too often pushes the exact opposite of these bedrock truths.  Every time you hear a politician speak, measure his words against this template.  I promise you that it will be an enlightening experience.

1. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
   
2. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
   
3. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
   
4. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
   
5. You cannot lift the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer.
   
6. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
   
7. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
   
8. You cannot establish sound security on borrowed money.
   
9. You cannot build character and courage by taking away a man’s initiative and independence.
   
10. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.

The “Ten Points” appear every February 12 in newspaper ads honoring Abraham Lincoln. In fact, these aphorisms are from the pen of Reverend William John Henry Boetcker (1873-1962).

Do You Know Any Big Words?

Antidisestablishmentarianism. My sister, Carol, taught me how to pronounce and spell that word when I could barely talk. It’s a twenty-eight lettered, twelve-syllabled term meaning “against the tearing down of churches.” It meant a lot in nineteenth century England and Ireland, but today, its main distinction is that it is one of the longest words in the English language. Now, it doesn’t even hold that record.  Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis, with forty-five letters and nineteen syllables is presently considered to be our longest word, according to Wikipedia. They dub it a “factitious” word, coined to describe a condition that most of us call “black lung disease.” Okay. That will probably do it…unless you want to talk about floccinaucinihilipilification…I didn’t think so.

My kindergarten teacher was pretty impressed with my ability to say and spell that big word, but I painfully discovered that others, especially my peers, were more apt to think I was a little freakish for knowing it. I did my best to speak normally for the rest of my childhood, but in high school I joined the debate team and things went south in the verbal arts. (See what I mean?) But, it was unavoidable. I mean, how can you intelligently discuss “Resolved: That nuclear weapons should be controlled by an international organization” without resorting to fine-tuned, multisyllabic words to express your meaning? Besides that, I had to compete against my opponents in front of English professors from institutions like the University of Michigan, Michigan State University and Wayne State University. To be non-conversant in technical terminology (I really am hopeless!) would be suicidal. After my third year of varsity debate competition, my penchant for big words had become ingrained in my brain.

In my view, big words can be shortcuts to precise communication. One right word can eliminate the need for ten to twenty little words to approximate the meaning. The problem is, of course, if the target audience doesn’t understand the word, the positive becomes a negative. The rule of thumb (called a heuristic) that I like is to use the basketball approach. The ten-foot high goal in basketball is low enough to be reachable, but high enough to be a challenge. What a silly game it would be if the goal were at the six foot level! Use words that may be slightly over people’s heads but not out of their reach. Make them stretch a little bit. Also, most people can understand bigger words, even if they don’t use them. Again, the audience dictates the style.

The downside of big words, however, can be catastrophic. Ever heard of obfuscation? It means making something so confusing, so opaque, that it hides the true meaning. The language of diplomacy, or diplospeak, has its place. “Diplomacy is primarily words that prevent us from reaching for our swords,” observed Bosnian scholar-diplomat Drazen Pehar. But if the same results happen, like one country taking over another, or one person robbing another person blind, then where is the advantage? Michael Crichton calls medical writing a “highly skilled, calculated attempt to confuse the reader”. ^[1] B.F. Skinner savages medical notation as a form of multiple audience control which allows the doctor to communicate to the pharmacist things which might be opposed by the patient if they could understand it. ^[2]

No arena uses more verbal obfuscation to garble up clarity than theology. The long war of words waged between Arius and Athanasius in the third and fourth centuries resulted in the classic doctrine of mumbo-jumbo and discombobulation, later known as trinitarianism. While I don’t want to be too harsh, see if you can understand some of its component pieces, as stated in the Creed of Athanasius: “8. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated. 9. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible. 10. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. 11. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal. 12. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.” The one thing incomprehensible about the doctrine is that it, in and of itself, is incomprehensible.

Today, many scholars have taken a step backwards from hardline trinitarianism because, in all honesty, they cannot make the concept mesh with the terminology. Cornerstone1.org writes, “ In a recent book on the Trinity, Catholic theologian Karl Rahner recognizes that theologians in the past have been “… embarrassed by the simple fact that in reality the Scriptures do not explicitly present a doctrine of the ‘imminent’ Trinity (even John’s prologue is no such doctrine)” (The Trinity, p. 22). (Author’s emphasis.) Other theologians also recognize the fact that the first chapter of John’s Gospel—the prologue— clearly shows the pre-existence and divinity of Christ and does not teach the doctrine of the Trinity. After discussing John’s prologue, Dr. William Newton Clarke writes: ‘There is no Trinity in this; but there is a distinction in the Godhead, a duality in God. This distinction or duality is used as basis for the idea of an only-begotten Son, and as key to the possibility of an incarnation” (Outline of Christian Theology, p. 167).

As you may surmise, we could go on forever discussing the aspects of the Trinitarian controversy. My purpose is simply to illustrate how our vocabulary can either clarify or confuse, depending upon our intent. The best strategy to use for accurate communication is to envision a ladder. When you climb a ladder, you are the same person, but you can reach different things the higher you climb. Likewise, the concept should remain unchanged at any level, even though the terminology may get more complex at higher levels. Whatever I attempt to convey to an audience, I must make sure that my word choice does not alter the basic meaning of my thought. Whenever we choose big words to fool people, to shade meanings or to manipulate minds, our methods are disingenuous.

This decidedly devious intent motivates much of the political correctness that literally plagues our culture today. In fact, nuancing or massaging the message is the very point in employing different words. Within a culture, people react to words in somewhat predictable ways. We use the word “stereotype” to express this idea. Some words are laden with emotional meaning; other words, although referring to the same thing, evoke only mild responses. Take the words “baby” and “fetus;” or, “unborn child” and “product of conception.” If we want to pump emotion into a thought, we use certain words. If we want to strip all the emotion out of the identical thought, we use words generally considered equivalent. Politicians have a field day with such euphemisms. They either use the word “taxation” or “investment”, depending on how they want their audiences to react. They use the phrase “boys and girls in uniform” or “military personnel” according to their intent. It is easy to see how this works. But people are smarter than that. Eventually, they will catch on that the speakers mean the same thing with the new words that they meant with the old ones. Once the speakers realize that they’ve been found out, it’s on to a new generation of equivocations, ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

Anyone who has ever worked with the deaf culture understands what it means to be straightforward and direct. Most deaf persons don’t clutter up their communication with equivocations, minced words and fluff. In fact, their style of speech is considered blunt or even rude to most hearing people. They don’t fool around with “obese”, “rotund”, “plump” or even “overweight.” They just say “fat.” They certainly would not say that someone was “aesthetically challenged.” No way. They’re just “ugly.” Because of the inherent constraints on their ability to communicate, they streamline their words to get at the meaning. When talking to hearing people, they often show great irritation because hearing people always “beat around the bush” instead of just coming out and saying what they mean. Many times, they even accuse hearing people of lying.

When big words are appropriate, use them. When the meaning you need to get across must diffuse hostilities, don’t use inflammatory words to stir up emotions. When the subject at hand is inherently complex, use language that is commensurate with the level of difficulty. Don’t talk up or down to people, don’t patronize people and don’t lie to people. My uncle used to say of a certain lawyer, “he was inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity.” He meant that he liked to hear himself talk. At the end of the day, word choice must be a function of expeditiousness. (What?!) Let me re-phrase. Choose words that best convey your specific meaning to your particular audience. If there is a precise word that applies to a thought, use it, and then explain it if you must. “Thingy, whatchamacallit, thing-a-ma-jig, do-hickey or ‘you know what I mean,’” are the first havens of the ignorant or lazy.

Oh yes. Floccinaucinihilipilification. It means, “the act or habit of estimating or describing something as worthless, or making something to be worthless by deprecation”, according to Wikipedia. It would be worth your time to log on to Wikipedia and listen to the pronunciation of this word. It probably would not be worth your time to think of how to use it in a sentence. Good wordsmithing.