Proclamation to the German Nation

The theme for this reading is restitution. When Hitler gave this speech, it was 14 years after they had lost World War I. The country felt like its previous rulers had let it down, and Hitler was sure to reinforce that idea.
In the text, it says that leading up to WWII, there was the use of poison gas on people and saturation bombing of citizens. Concentration camps were also established. Additionally, Neville Chamberlain tried desperately to appease Hitler to avoid another world war; unfortunately, all his efforts were in vain. 
I know it was mentioned in class, but I think it's very interesting that Hitler addresses God. He says that since the day that their former rulers had sold them out, "the Almighty withheld his blessing from their people." He also calls upon God at the end of his speech and asks him to give the Germans his blessing. When I think of Hitler, I think of a cruel, godless man. Of course, he may be just putting on a front for the Germans.
I think reading this made me see Hitler as more human. When I was in high school, I didn't study this at all. Reading something that he said puts personality and a brain in this man that was never there before.
In class today it was mentioned that today's Holocaust could be abortion. I completely agree with that statement. There are millions of innocent lives being lost because they're not considered human. I don't know how you can convince yourself that a fetus is anything but. And I don't know how someone can look at a fully grown person and think that they are lesser and deserve death when they've done nothing wrong.
I don't know what I could be capable of if I was desperate enough.

The War Prayer by Mark Twain

The theme of this reading is double entendre. The church congregation prays one thing, but they don't realize what they are actually praying to happen. This piece of writing wasn't published until after Twain's death, mostly due to pressure from his family to refrain from doing so because it could be sacrilegious. According to "Mark Twain: A Biography" by Albert Bigelow Paine, when Twain's publisher asked him if he wanted to publish it anyway he said, "No. I have told the whole truth in that, and only dead men can tell the truth in this world. It can be published after I am dead."

Twain wrote this before both World Wars and it was published in 1923, five years after the first World War ended. The Schlieffen Plan, written by Germany, had just been devised in 1905. This plan was created around the idea that war would be quick and "painless", in a manner of speaking. There seems to be a same way of thinking between the Germans and the congregation members of this story. They both see the good side of war - war is romanticized, in a sense.

Something I find interesting about this reading is that Twain brings in a messenger from God to speak truth to the congregation. And after all that, after everything he says, people think that he was a lunatic. I understand that this is a work of fiction, but honestly, how could they not see that there are two sides to every victory? Does that go back to what we were talking about in class today - that their enemies were de-humanized and so they deserved all the pain and suffering? I guess it was a different time, but surely people understood death by then.

Today I see this de-humanizing in the retail industry. Human trafficking is not just about sex...it's also about people being forced to work for almost free (if not absolutely free!) in poor facilities, while being treated like less than human. All this so that we can get a "good deal" at Walmart. I'm sure that's not the only business that allows for their goods to be manufactured by people who have been trafficked. So for every good deal that we find or "pray for" like the congregation in this reading did, there is another side of people who are being mistreated for us to get that deal.

Rudyard Kipling, The White Man's Burden (1899)

The theme of this reading is facetiousness. As I interpret it, Kipling's poetry appears to be mocking the "white man." I couldn't find anything in Chapter 22 of the text pertaining to this reading.
I am surprised to read something like this. I didn't know that there were people writing this sort of sarcastic material. I assumed that people were serious, and they were either for or against slavery.
A good modern example is the 1984 movie This Is Spinal Tap. This movie makes fun of the rock music industry, something that was taken very seriously during the '80s.

Report on Committee on Children in Manufactories

The theme of this reading is cruelty. Children during this time period were treated poorly in the work environment. They were forced to work long hours in textile mills and mines, and on top of that they were exploited and treated as less-than-human, according to the text on page 436.
Social reform began during the Industrial Revolution because people saw what was happening to the children and wanted it to stop. One such man, Michael Sadler, saw it as his Christian duty to help them. He was a Tory member of the British Parliament, and he saw to it that a bill was passed that limited the number of hours a child could work per day. Even though most employers did not follow this law, it still aided in getting the ball rolling for others.
I was surprised to read, in Sir Robert Peel's statement, that the growth of the children appeared to have been stinted. I didn't actually know that was a concern, and I'm not sure how that would work. Perhaps it has something to do with getting little to no sleep because they were working so much.
This is still happening today! There are children being put to work in other countries so that we can have cheaper goods here in America. It sickens me to know every time I shop in Walmart that a child in a third-world country had to be put to work. My friend once quoted S. Ford, saying, "Every time you see the Walmart smiley bouncing around and slashing prices, somewhere there's a worker being kicked in the stomach."
I don't know what we can do about this. Walmart is such a big corporation, and it would take everyone in America to step back and stop purchasing items from them in order for Walmart to take another look at themselves. The best we can do is double check everything we buy and look at the retailers that we are purchasing from so that we know that a child or exploited worker hadn't been put to work to make what we have.

Thoughts Upon Slavery John Wesley Published in the year 1774

The theme of this reading is "appealing." Not in the "attractive" sense of the word, but instead to make a serious or urgent request.
Slavery has been in our world for a long time. Although it has gone through phases, it is still the same concept: people are owned by people. John Wesley is writing this in a time where slavery is the biggest and most commercial trade that it has ever been.
I think it's incredibly interesting that Wesley writes about where the slaves are brought from - especially their country. He asks of their home, "Is it so remarkably horrid, dreary, and barren, that it is a kindness to deliver them out of it? I believe many have apprehended so; but it is an entire mistake, if we may give credit to those who have lived many years therein, and could have no motive to misrepresent it."
I didn't know that there were people who thought that bringing Africans to Europe was "saving" them from horrible living conditions. I thought that everyone just knew exactly what they were doing. I can see now though that in that time they didn't have a lot of access to information about Africa, so "bad guys" could feed them lies about how they were helping them out.
Slavery has been abolished, but that doesn't mean it has gone away. While there isn't a commercial slave trade, there are still people being used in other countries. There is sex slavery, which is prevalent not only in other countries but also the United States.

Condemnation and Recantation of Galileo

The theme of this reading is submission. Galileo was required to submit to the church and tell them that everything he had discovered was a "lie."
Galileo  never actually admitted to believing in a heliocentric universe, even though his writings allow us to believe that he does. However, even the mere fact that he was presenting ideas opposite to the Bible as probable was considered heresy. His trial was conducted in such a manner that everyone against him was on the jury. The text book says that the pope would have been seen as weak if he had accepted Galileo's defense.
I am surprised how fully and humbly Galileo recanted everything he had discovered. He knew it was true, yet he submitted to the church and even went so far as to apologize for saying what he said. I guess, if it had been me, I would have done the same thing just to keep the peace. Depressing.
As I wrote that last paragraph, I saw that Galileo and I are not much different. When I first read about it, I saw him as a weakling and that he should have stood up for what he believed. However, I started thinking about how I am harmonious to the point of foregoing stating my own opinions in order to keep the peace. Galileo was just doing whatever he could to keep the peace.
Modernly, this could be compared to the Amish. The reason I thought of them is because they have a strict way of living, and it's based off of the Bible. If any of their children go against what the Amish believe, they are excommunicated from the community. In a way, they are put in the same position that Galileo was in...either recant and stick with what the church believes or be punished.

Raimon de Cornet (14th cent troubadour) Poem Criticizing the Avignon Papacy

The theme of this reading is criticism. The author points out everything that the papacy is doing wrong, and asserts that the motivation is money and greed.
During this time, when the pope was moved to Avignon, the Italian papacy was losing money. This led them to receive money from questionable sources, such as "accepting kickbacks from appointees to church offices, taking bribes for judicial decisions, and selling indulgences," according to the text. (Levak, p. 211)
I think the most interesting thing to me in this song is the matter-of-fact tone the author uses. He lays everything out in poetic form, and calls out the church leaders.
Modernly, this is seen through spoken word. There have been several poets that speak out against the word "religion." They say that Christianity is a relationship...not a religion.
While these aren't exactly the same thing (religious leaders aren't stealing money from people), they are coming from people who are fed up with religious practices that harm other people. Religion has such a bad connotation in our society today. This is because Christians aren't living by the James passage from the Bible that tells us that pure religion is caring for orphans, widows, and the poor.

Requerimiento

The theme of this reading is submission. The requerimiento was written to be read to the natives of the different lands that conquistadores, Spanish adventurers, would find. The requerimiento was a document that laid out Christian principles along with the pronouncement of the pope and king's authority. If the natives did not accept this document and submit to their authority, then the conquistadores were free to declare war on them.
This document mainly served as a reason to make war with natives. More likely than not, when someone comes into your hometown and requests that you change religions or engage in combat, if you believe in something strongly enough, you will choose a war. The text says that on one hand, the Spanish were "sincerely interested in converting the natives to Christianity...on the other, the conquistadores were trying to justify the immorality of their actions by suggesting that the natives had brought the attack on themselves by refusing to obey the Spanish king." (Levak, p. 255)
I think it is interesting that they are giving the people the choice of either accepting Christianity or (basically) dying. The message of Jesus is love, and He accepted people right where they were at - tax collectors, harlots, and thieves. People seem to miss that a lot. 
Which brings me to my modern day example: the Westboro Baptist church. These people want to convert people. They honestly believe that they are loving people when they picket funerals with hate signs. However, they do not realize how awful this is, and they are leaving people with a terribly bad taste in their mouths...much like I am sure the conquistadores were doing for other Christian Spaniards. 
A new idea it generated was the fact that we are so quick to judge people by their stereotype. I know this is an age-old idea, but it really hit home when I realized that the Christian stereotype is what we see in the media. And who is in the media? The Westboro Baptist church. I do not want people to look down on me because of what those people are doing. I want them to see who Christ really is by how I am loving people where they are at.

The Famine of 1315

The theme of this reading was hunger. The poor were not the only ones who were starving; even the king, when he came to visit, could not feed his entire party.
The text says that the weather was changing in a way that had never occurred before, and this caused the rains to come for long periods of time. When the weather altered the normal patterns that people were used to, it ended up causing the grains and other crops to rot. This weather continued and caused a famine.
I think it is interesting that people were so hungry that they are said to have secretly eaten their own children. I can't even imagine that intense of a famine that you are okay with that idea. We have poverty today, and even a lack of food. But I can't think of anyone in their right mind who would consider something of that magnitude. However, these people, judging by the fact that they have absolutely no food, were probably not thinking right and made the choice to stay alive by whatever means necessary.
It's hard to imagine life being any different than it is now. Even looking back to when I was 10, the internet was still a fairly new idea and cell phones were miles away from where they are now. To think, 697 years ago people were starving and depending on what they had been taught from previous farmers on when to grow crops. I can't imagine how hard it must've been to sit by and watch this all happen.
In America today you do not see any famine. Poverty, yes, but there has always been food to buy. While there may be recalls on some food items, we are always fully stocked with groceries. In other countries where they still depend solely on their crops, they may be more apt to have famines. With the weather changes our world has been going through, we may be headed straight for another famine.

Charter of Homage and Fealty of Bernard Atton, A. D. 1110

The theme of this reading is loyalty. Fealty specifically means "a feudal tenant's or vassal's sworn loyalty to a lord," while homage literally means "formal public acknowledgment of feudal allegiance."
This document is between viscount Bernard Atton and lord abbot Leo. Bernard Atton gives his homage and fealty to Leo and promises to take care of Leo's property. This is a great example of feudalism in the Middle Ages. Feudalism, at its core, is when two parties exchange loyalty for protection. The richer offers to protect the poorer, and the poorer (in return) will take care of the wealthier individual's property.
I think the most interesting thing in this document, to me, is that Bernard states that he will cover the costs of everything to see that Leo has the most comfortable journey and a delicious meal. In addition to this, Bernard also says that he will pay to feed and shoe Leo's horse. I would have thought that Leo would take care of his own stuff.
Modern-day feudalism comes in a few different forms. One blog I read said that she viewed capitalism as a sort of feudalism. She says that celebrities, executives, and athletes have the most money and power in our society and basically control how people think. And we let them have that control because when they do something, we talk about it and reinforce their actions. I can agree with her somewhat, but I don't feel comfortable agreeing with her wholeheartedly.

Pope Gregory II - Appeal to Charles Martel, 739

The theme of today's reading was mercy. The author of the letter was looking for a break from what he calls an "affliction." Pope Gregory II, the person who wrote this letter, begs Charles "the Hammer" Martel for his help against the Lombards from Italy. Martel is best known for his battle against the Muslims.
Pope Gregory II tried as hard as he could to maintain a good relationship with the Lombards. It was pretty difficult for him to do when the Lombards took Cumae. This caused Rome to be cut off from Naples.
Pope Gregory II was afraid that the Lombards were trying to take all of Italy, one region at a time. That was when he appealed to Charles Martel. Unfortunately, Wikipedia says, Martel did not respond to his request.
I think it's interesting that the Lombards completely disregard the Pope. I was under the impression that the national religion is Roman Catholicism, but maybe that came at a later date. Although, this could be a rebel group that didn't necessarily fall under any type of religion.
While reading this, the idea that I had was that it's strange that Martel would engage in a battle against Muslims, but wasn't too keen on helping the Roman Catholics. I could give him the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe he didn't get the letter. Or, perhaps, he was too busy to respond.
However, one could also say that it's just like humans to pick and choose who they are against. In today's Christian culture, we pick homosexuals or fornicators or promiscuous men and women. What about the prideful? The people who tell little white lies? What about the people committing "little" sins? Really, they're all the same to God.

Didache

The Didache was written in the first century, dated around 40-60 CE. It was supposedly written by the Apostles, and in 1873 a man by the name of Philotheos Bryennios discovered a Greek manuscript. J. Schlect discovered a Latin version of the Didache in 1900. Parts of the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles are said to be the "oldest written catechism," according to the Wikipedia website dedicated to this subject.
Honestly, I think the only modern parallels we can make today is the Constitution. Our Constitution and laws lay the moral groundwork for our culture. They tell us what we can and cannot do, but the only difference is that it doesn't tell us what we should do, such as letting our neighbor steal from us.
All in all, there aren't very many parallels you can pull from this reading and our culture today. The theme of this literature is purity. The idea behind the rules, or guidelines, listed in this writing is to make you pure before God. Pure heart, pure body, pure mind. 1:9 directs the reader to "abstain from fleshly and bodily lusts." In the middle of 2:2 the author orders listeners not to commit fornication.
In addition to this theme, we also see the writer putting a lot of emphasis on loving one another. As in the Bible we know today, the author says that if a person is to slap us on the cheek, we must give him the other. If a person should "take your cloak, give him your coat also." (1:12)
I think it is interesting in 2:2 that the author instructs his reader "not to corrupt boys." I am not sure what the author intended that to mean, but it sounds like it could mean one of two things: that the reader must not lead the boy into a sinful lifestyle, or, and this may be a stretch, that the reader must not violate or sexually harm the boy. I am not completely sure of the meaning, but either way, I thought it was interesting that the author would mention that.
As I read this piece, I was reminded of how we have to read the Bible today. Our culture is completely different than it was in Bible times, so we're required to decide the timelessness or timeliness of the things we read. There are some things that are obviously timeless, but other things are in a gray area...can we still do that thing? Why or why not?
I think as a Christian culture, that's something we struggle with a lot these days. If we have too many rules, we're legalistic. If we don't have enough rules, people question whether or not we're really Christians. I think it's important to have rules and beliefs and to think things contrary to our secular, sexualized culture. But something that God has been known to do is take the customs of the day and infuse them with His presence. God is really, REALLY good at that. Us, not so much. The Christian music genre is just one example...and I really could go on and on and...well, I'll stop there.

The Luxury of the Rich in Rome

A theme I found when reading this piece of literature was political stratification. There were a few types of Romans: noble political leaders, equestrians, and slaves. The political leaders held the highest ranks in society. The equestrians did not hold political offices, but instead knew politicians personally. The slaves' only connection to political leaders was when they were required to serve them.
As a whole, the Romans were a wealthy people. They put dignity and duty on a pedestal and highly regarded art, literature, and philosophy. In this reading, the author, Ammianus Marcellinus, speaks about how the culture responds to different things that happen in society. At one point he states that the wealthy treat their horses like they are disposable. I am paraphrasing, of course, but I think that gives us a pretty good picture of their society that they would consider transportation animals something of low importance.
As I read this material, I was forced to stop and ponder this society. How was it that you were either the elite or a slave? Their "middle-class" is considered our "upper-class." They were so rich and took it for granted.
But that is just like Americans today. We don't even realize how rich we are, yet we treat our stuff like we are rich enough to replace it any time. We are never content, always wanting more. How is it that we never have enough?

The Code of the Assura

The Code of the Assyrians revolves around the theme of relationships, mostly between males and females. The rules that are laid out concern adultery, homosexuality, and animals.
Something that stood out to me in this reading was I.47. In this passage, the writer strictly prohibits sorcery. If there is a person who is found committing this crime, the author demands that they be put to death. This is interesting to me because their culture was not God-centered. They were heathens and pagans, so one would assume that they accepted things like this. Additionally, one would also think that this culture encouraged experimentation with homosexuality or promiscuity. However, this entire law code is completely against all of those things.
This makes me wonder about Bible times. My knowledge of history never included a society wherein there were good morals but no Christian God. I made the presumption that if they weren't following God, they were making poor decisions and living their lives selfishly and in any sort of capacity they chose.
In modern times, I think of secular individuals where they make family and their community a priority. They have morals; they know not to kill people. They're not Christians. They're just "good people."
The reading also speaks about prostitutes and how they are to be treated. In I.40, the writer delegates that women of higher social status are to wear head coverings in public, while harlots are ordered not to wear head coverings. While they are publicly humiliated in this way, they are protected in I.51. This ordinance directs that if a man abuses a harlot and causes her to miscarry, then that man is to be beaten as much as he beat her. In today's day and age, women are protected from abuse just as they were in this code written so many years ago.
The text delves into the Code of Hammurabi, a 282-rule document that introduces us to the idea of "an eye for an eye." It was written in 1772 BCE, 697 years before the Code of Assura was written. Hammurabi believed that the punishment should fit the crime. He also realized the importance of the irrigation system that was in Babylon, and several of the rules revolve around the preservation and conservation of the system. Other rules are very similar to the ones listed in the Code of Assura.
Overall, while this Code doesn't necessarily apply to our American society today, it has some slight relevance in that they believe the punishment should fit the crime.