Why Pit bulls should not be banned Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Why Pit bulls should not be banned - Essay Example The controversy surrounding particular breed of pit bulls is hidden from nobody these days. It is believed that the controversial rumors intended to attach a horrendous and notorious reputation to these dogs are specially appreciated by those who do not own one of these themselves. In contrast, the proponents of pit bull bans argue that dog bite epidemic has become a recognized problem in the US lately and it is high time now that weight actions at superior level be made to pin down the reports of pit bulls killing and maiming people. Facts and discussion presented in this essay are meant to illuminate the reality of the claim that â€Å"pit bulls should not be banned rather efforts should be directed at educating the dog owners and people and passing the strictest criminal and dog control laws.† There is an increasing need to acknowledge the fact that on grounds of only a few nasty and sorry incidents, not all pit bulls should be banned because unreasonable aggression is not a part of their nature and they tend to attack only under certain stressful or perilous circumstances. Not just pit bull but any other dog also would feel compelled to attack upon being annoyed by owners or other people who are not properly educated about a certain breed’s specifics which implies that people are to be blamed for the pit bull bite problem and not the entire breed itself. The idea of banning pit bulls should be condemned by everyone as one argument against implementation of breed specific laws reasonably suggests that â€Å"banning a breed is like human racial discrimination† (Phillips). ... roponents of pit bull bans claim that not only pit bulls but all closely related breeds should be banned which reflects a severe violation of animal rights because if it is really desired to put an end to the dog bite issues in the US, then those criminal minded dog owners should be apprehended and interrogated who subject the pit bulls to insanely hard to believe cruel and atrocious treatment as a way of making them violently dangerous. Why pit bulls are judged in such a negative and biased manner and arguments are made to ban them when they are not the culprits in the first place but innocent victims of severe abuse and cruelty? The proponents of pit bull bans should actually question their own flawed argument to â€Å"ban pit bulls and their closely related breeds† (Phillips). Another popular argument enthusiastically spread by the proponents of pit bull bans is related to the extreme danger associated with pit bulls because apparently this danger is so well established tha t these dogs are held responsible for about â€Å"75% of all reported canine-inflicted human deaths in the past two decades† (Phillips). What is sad is that the large group of advocates openly supporting the breed bans also includes some respected figures like Ingrid Newkirk whose opinions are trusted and considered valid. But the important thing is not to blindly believe someone else’s beliefs but to responsibly take up an issue to explore it in an impartial manner and reach decisions as objectively as possible. Considering the long history of cruel treatment of pit bulls at hands of the inhuman owners, the banning argument loses its validity along with the claim that pit bulls and other closely related breeds account for majority of all canine-inflicted deaths reported in the US. This is because

Cost Management Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Cost Management - Essay Example Using learning lessons from General Electric, and through referencing personal experiences with cost management, learning associated with cost management and future projections about competent business planning can be developed. It is necessary to understand the demand environment and operational costs in order to successfully meet budget guidelines and secure effective cost management. Main Issues Mattel company did not fully understand its demand environment, thus the business was making decisions, strategically for long-term financial gain, that would not be sustained according to models of product life cycle. The product life cycle model recognizes the gains associated with new product launch and then follows the viability of products throughout the time period where product would be accepted by consumer markets. The life cycle model recognizes that products will eventually reach a maturity stage where new technologies or innovations begin to make demand volumes obsolete, thus th e business must be equipped to launch new products to offset any losses that occur. Dooley (2005) offers that it is extremely difficult to predict whether a product will have a long and profitable life cycle or whether the product, due to competition or even changing social and lifestyle needs, will have a long period where profit is sustainable. Mattel acquired a software company, Learning Co., as a means of diversifying its product portfolio and thus offering customers more selection of product and to ensure the business sustained its quality brand in the minds of buyers. Some of the main software titles were Carmen Sandiego and other relevant software characters that were associated with lifestyle and child values. Mattel believed that this decision would provide software titles with significantly-long product life cycles, thus offering more profitability through sales volumes. Soon after acquisition, Mattel realized that the decision to utilize these particular software names wa s not leading to the profit expected, thus leading to higher operational costs without sales volumes to sustain projections. It was assumed that the Carmen Sandiego, and other relevant brands, would have a much longer growth period in the life cycle than consumers actually favored. The end result: Mattel was left with very high operational costs, such as inventory and supply chain, which left the business with little options but to divest some of its business holdings. General Electric, on the other hand, understands the importance of not only diversifying its portfolio of products, but to create systems and feedback mechanisms that recognize the majority of costs during the planning process. Mattel was looking too closely at the consumer environment without realizing that some products would ultimately reach the maturity stage long before projections suspected. What did this indicate? It suggested that Mattel was not proactive in creating a well diversified product line, the firm d id not understand fully what was driving consumer demand ratios, and that Mattel had significant failures associated with manufacture and related operational costs. Mattel, in its proverbial effort to put all of its eggs in one software basket, did not create a supply chain methodology that would sustain unique product innovation and growth

The Cold War in Europe Essay Example for Free

The Cold War in Europe Essay How far do you agree that the Cold War in Europe broke out because Soviet and Western leaders misinterpreted each others words and actions? The Cold War broke out in 1945 (although some have argued other years) with the Yalta and Potsdam Conferences. They were held to discuss what was to be done with the peace of Europe and how to rebuild the damage that had been caused. It was at these meetings that the Americans and Russians slowly began to mistrust one another, even though they were previously war-time allies. During the Potsdam Conference in July/August of 1945, America declared that they had tested the first Atomic Bomb (which President Harry Truman referred to as the greatest thing in history). Stalin was suspicious as to why America had not told him previously, and after this, relations spiraled down rapidly. But it was at this time that Americas suspicions of the USSR were beginning to settle in and it was Harry Truman who later said that unless Russia is faced with an iron fist and strong language another war is in the making Their first misinterpretation was over the issue of Poland and what was to happen to it now that the war was over. Russia had been attacked through this country on numerous occasions, including World War 1 and 2 and had lost approximately 25 million people, 700 towns destroyed and their steel industry cut by half. They were keen to dominate and occupy most of the land in order to prevent any further attacks through this country. On the other hand, Britain had gone to war over Poland and was keen for it to remain independent. Also, there was a Polish Government who had been forced into exile at the beginning of the war and Britain was now keen for them to return to power. As for America, they became extremely suspicious of Russias plans and believed that Russia merely wanted to spread Communism. Unlike at the end of World War 1, they were determined not to appease Stalin as Britain had done with Hitler. It should be remembered that they did have the right to believe that Stalin only had the intentions of spreading communism through the quotation of Karl Marx. He declared that We are living not merely in a state, but in a system of states and its inconceivable that the Soviet Republic should continue to exist for a long period side-by-side with imperialist states. The Warsaw Pact and Marshall Aid are other examples of how the two great powers misunderstood each other, thus causing a start of the Cold War. Western suspicions rose to a height when Stalin refused to allow Marshall Aid to be distributed to Soviet-occupied countries. As a result, the Warsaw Pact was created in retaliation. It could have actually been an attack towards the West, or Stalin trying to hold together his buffer states and prevent them from turning to Capitalism. There are some smaller matters that show that the Cold War was the result of misunderstandings. For example, the Long Telegram, this was written by George Kennan in February 1946. George Kennan was the USAs Deputy Chief of Mission to the US Embassy in Moscow and in a telegram he declared that the Soviets were aggressive and suspicious and only a hard-line approach would contain Communism. It declared that world communism is like a malignant parasite that feeds on diseased tissue. It [the USSR] does not take unnecessary risks. Impervious to the logic of reason. It is highly sensitive to the logic of force thus, if the adversary [the USA] has sufficient force and makes clear his readiness to use it, he rarely has to do so. Taking this evidence from the eyes of a Revolutionist thinker, it can be said that George Kennan was rash and presumed this with little prior knowledge. But there were other factors which led to the beginning of the Cold War. People such as Vojtech Mastny have accused Stalin as being the sole man to cause the Cold War. He regarded Stalins foreign policy in Eastern Europe as the cause of the Cold War. His Red Army liberated land, therefore claiming it to be theirs. To the USA, this looked aggressive and a determined effort at spreading World Communism. The Berlin Blockade was the first direct attack on the West from the Soviet Union. It started when Berlin was divided into 4 parts and these 3 parts that belonged to the West were surrounded by Soviet territory. This upset and frightened Stalin as he believed that they would influence his Eastern Berlin and Germany. In rebellion, he closed of all the main routes by land, sea and road that lead into West Berlin. In response to this, America began to send in 450 aeroplanes of food and other supplies each day in order to prevent West Berlin from collapse. The America viewed all of this as a first attack on them and so serious action was necessary. But, although it may have seemed like the Soviets wanted to starve all the West Berliners to death, he probably wanted to prevent the emergence of a separate West German state under US influence (West Berlin was improving its economy greatly and the currency had even been changed). In response to all of this, America created NATO, which was a military alliance aimed against further Soviet aggression. And so, although it was seen as the first attack, there are also underlying misunderstandings to be considered. Some other explanations include the fact that it was simply inevitable. The end of the war left a power-vacuum in which countries such as Eastern Europe and Germany sucked the Powers in and so aggression would naturally occur. Louis Halle, the author of The Cold War as History once stated that the decision to eliminate German power from Europe rather than make peace was the basic cause of the Cold War. The collapse of the Grand Alliance can also have been seen as inevitable. During the Yalta Conference, the war-time allies spoke and they all generally agreed on matters. But by the time the Potsdam Conference came a few months later, Roosevelt had died and been replaced with Harry Truman and Winston Churchill had been replaced with George Atlee. Only Stalin remained and this meant that neither of the other powers really knew him. They became suspicious quickly and disliked everything he did. It can be said that as a result of all of this, the Grand Alliance was destined to collapse and then after that tensions rose and the Cold War began. Another reason can be seen in the Commonwealth and other such countries that were occupied by the Powers, only in this case it was Britain, France and Portugal who suffered the power-vacuum. Many of these countries had been promised independence if they fought with their occupying country and now that the war was over they were independent and left vulnerable to Communism. The Soviet Union would naturally spread into these countries and as a result, the USA would become suspicious of the Soviet Union. Also the fact that all the countries had suffered badly during the war (with the exception of America, whos industry had doubled) meant that they were all desperate to regain their reputation in World Status and so felt that by gaining land would they become more powerful. And so, with many of the countries trying to rebuild their prestige, arguments and suspicion would naturally arise. The USSR had also just become a World Leader and after many years of shying away, they felt that they needed to exert their power, although this could be a much debated view and one usually take by a Traditionalist thinker. There has been much debate over who really started the Cold War. A traditionalist thinker would say that it was the doings of the Soviet Union, whereas a Revolutionist would say that America was to blame and finally a Post-Revolutionist would say that it was the work of both Powers. A traditionalist would argue that Russia only had plans to spread Communism in an aggressive manner and Britain and the USA were only trying to be defensive. On the other hand, a Revolutionist would assert that it was the Americans who were all to blame and that they were aggressive even before the start of the Second World War. And so in conclusion, I would say that the Cold War was a result of mainly misunderstandings but it should be remembered that there were many other reasons as to why the USA and the USSR became so suspicious of each other, for example, the fact that there was a huge power-vacuum both around the world and in Europe and the Berlin Blockade of 1948.

Priesthood Of All Believers Theology Religion Essay

Priesthood Of All Believers Theology Religion Essay Luthers greatest contribution to Protestant ecclesiology was his doctrine of priesthood of all believers. It was a central teaching of Luther in the formation of Christian communities. Eric W. Gritsch has claimed, Luthers doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, developed particularly in his treatises of 1520, is one of the most revolutionary doctrines in the history of Christianity.  [1]  It is the clear biblical idea that we could see from the Genesis to Revelation. The doctrine of the priesthood of all believers opposes the unbiblical doctrine of sacerdotalism  [2]  and the existence of a Brahman-like  [3]  priestly class within the church. When Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-five Theses on the door of Wittenberg Castle Church on October 31, 1517, he was declaring war against the idea that salvation comes through the priesthood via the sacraments. His theses were anti-sacerdotalistic and he spoke against the theology that ex opere operato  [4]  supernatural li fe could be created through baptism, brought to growth by confirmation, nourished by the Mass, and healed of all diseases by penance and extreme unction. Luther vehemently rejected the idea that through sacraments a priest could control an individuals life both here and hereafter. Luther claimed that everyone who does have faith in Jesus Christ is a priest. He wrote that his hope was for a day when we shall recover that joyful liberty in which we shall understand that we are all equal in every right, and shall shake off the yoke of tyranny, and know that he who is a Christian has Christ, and he who has Christ has all things that are Christs, and can do all things.  [5]  The concept that all who believe in Christ are priests came into mind to Luther after he became convinced that Scripture was the only authority for a Christian. Believers are called to be the salt and the light (Matthew 5:13), this is only possible when the believers understands Christs priestly ministry and its own priestly role. This also has serious eschatological implications, as Christ comes to be united with his bride, the Church. Will He find a fragmented body or a united family of believers? Hence this paper mainly examines that where from the concept of priesthood of all believers begins in the Bible and for what purpose; what is the context that steered Luther to raise this idea of priesthood of all believers; the coherence between Luthers idea and the biblical idea of priesthood of all believers; and its implication to the present church of India. I. THE ORIGIN OF THE CONCEPT OF PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE BIBLE A priest is one who performs the sacrifices, makes the rituals and doing the work of mediator between God and man. He is the one responsible for offering the divinely appointed sacrifices to God, for executing ceremonies relating to the worship of God. In other sense, he is the representative between man and God. Scripture says, For every high priest, being taken from among men, is appointed for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins.  [6]  The priestly office came first in time, when our first parents sinned and fell from the high estate into which they had been created. God Himself performed the priestly office when He slew animals and provided a covering for Adam and Eve.  [7]   A. PRIESTHOOD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT There were three orders of men in the Old Testament times such as the kingly, the prophetical and the priestly orders. They were set apart by anointing with holy oil for a particular vocation. A king in the Old Testament was one who ruled men for God. A prophet was one who spoke for God to men. And a priest was one who spoke for men to God. Among all these three orders, even from the very beginning of the human race, the believers have performed priestly works. In the particular period, the head of the family was doing the priestly office. He would build an altar and offer a sacrifice for the help from God. Scripture gives enough evidence for that. 1. Priesthood in the Patriarchal Age In the Bible history, the first period is commonly known as Patriarchal Age. The word patriarch comes from two root words meaning father rule. It encompasses the period between the creation events, and the time when Israel was separated as a special nation at Sinai for the preparation of the coming Messiah. In Genesis 4:3-5 both Cain and Abel functioned in the capacity of priest in that each was responsible for his own offering to God. We could see that when Noah disembarked the ark following the great flood, he offered sacrifices on behalf of his family.  [8]  Abram, after a long march from Ur, came into Canaan and built an altar at Shechem.  [9]  Again and again, Abraham offered sacrifices to God, as did his sons and grandsons. Thus, originally in mans relations with God, every individual functioned as his own priest before God with no particular location established for sacrificing and with no intermediary between him and God.  [10]  When He gave the Law at Mount Sinai , the people of Israel had been given an opportunity to become a kingdom of priests. Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.  [11]   Here God makes a covenant with all the people of Israel. Based on the above text, the people of Israel become Gods possession and are chosen for the privilege of service. God instituted the priesthood of Israel as a congregated unit for the purpose of service to the world. This is the vocation of the people of God of which each member stands under Gods call, and each is accountable for his or her response to it. 2. A Shift on Priesthood But Israel disobeyed and God removed the opportunity for becoming a kingdom of priests. When Moses went up to the mountain to receive a list of rules and regulations for the newly freed nation, God also gave him instructions to form a professional priesthood. Now each layman would no longer be his own priest, the individual could no longer take his sacrifices directly to God.  [12]  Here God selected Aaron and his family and the tribe of Levi to be His priests. They were set apart that when Israelites entered the Promised Land, the priests and Levites received no inheritance of land as the other eleven tribes. They had been set apart for the service of God and were to be supported by the tithes and offerings of the peoples sacrifices. The sons of Aaron and the tribe of Levi had at least three distinctive as priests. 1. They had direct access to God. At appointed times they went into the Holy Place and even the Holy of Holies to communicate with God. 2. The priests represented God to the people of Israel. They were mediators who communicated the Word of God to the people since they were considered holy. 3. The people represented the people of Israel to God. The people could not approach a holy God directly because of their sin. The priests were mediators for the people as they brought sacrifices before the altar. The high priest entered the Holy of Holies yearly once on the Day of Atonement to offer an atoning substitute of a bull or lamb offering. One of the most important features of the priestly system was to emphasize the absolutely holy nature of Almighty God. This is a concept repeatedly affirmed in the Scriptures.  [13]   B. PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIVERS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT This was the situation continued Jesus Christ was crucified. At the same moment of Jesus death, the veil of the Temple was ripped from top to bottom.  [14]  From then on there has been no need for select group of priests. At that point in time and ever since then believers became priests, a part of Gods royal or kingly priesthood. The elimination of the office of priests as a select group of people is based, then, upon the physical sacrifice of Jesus, the ultimate High Priest. Jesus completed and fulfilled the role of priest in His substitutionary death. . . . but He became a priest with an oath when God said to Him: The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind: You are a priest forever. Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant . . . because Jesus lives forever, He has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to savecompletely . . . Such a high priest meets our need-one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. . . . Unlike the other high priests, He does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for His own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when He offered Himself. For the law appoints as high priest men who are weak; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.  [15]   The priest, then, is the person who himself has access to God and whose task it is to bring others to Him. While in the ancient world this access to God was the privilege of the professional priests, and in particular of the High Priest who alone could enter into the Holy of Holies. But now through Jesus Christ, the new and living way, access to God becomes the privilege of every Christian. The word priest comes from the Latin presbyter and the Greek presbyteros which simply means elder. This word was later used to describe the leader of a community. In modern usage the term priest seems to be derived more from the actual Greek word for priest hiereus.  [16]  In the New Testament this word is never used to describe a class or caste of people separate from the people of God. Instead, it is used in the sense all Gods people are a chosen race, a royal priesthood  [17]  The New Testament believers constitute the succession to the priesthood in old Israel, having been given the right of direct access to God through Christ. Furthermore, the ministry in the church has replaced the ancient priesthood. Hence, all the believers in Christ are priests in the New Testament. Put into historical perspective, the priesthood concept would look like this: for the first several thousand years mankinds history as recorded in the Bible, each man was responsible for functioning as a priest before God. Then, for approximately 1500 years, the time between Moses and when Christ appeared on earth, the priesthood of the professional existed. From the death of Christ until He returns again, we have reverted to the pre-Sinai days of the priesthood of the believer.  [18]   II. THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF MARTIN LUTHERS REFORMATIVE THOUGHT It is better to look back the history of the church to understand that how the New Testament idea of priesthood of all believers was perverted into the Roman Catholic Idea of Institutionalism. A. PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE EARLY CHURCH HISTORY The doctrine of the priesthood of all believers is found throughout the Scriptures and was practiced in the early church. As Dr. R. Laird Harris writes, First century Christianity had no priests. The New Testament nowhere uses the word to describe a leader in Christian service.  [19]  But this glorious doctrine was gradually replaced by sacerdotalism beginning in the third century, especially by Cyprian (c. 258) Bishop of Carthage. Cyprian treated all the passages in the Old Testament that refer to the privileges, the sanctions, the duties, and the responsibilities of the Aaronic Priesthood, as applying to the officers of the Christian Church.  [20]  He completely failed to grasp the central thesis of the Epistle to the Hebrews. He was blind to the fact that the only High Priest under the Gospel recognized by the apostolic writings is our Lord Himself  [21]  and not a solitary pope or bishop or priest of the church. So from the third century onwards the priesthood of all believers was not visible in theological thinking. But the Roman Catholic theologians justified sacerdotalism by saying that Jesus gave the keys of the kingdom to Peter, the rock upon whom Jesus would build his church. Further they says that Peter was the first pope of Rome, and so the pope of Rome by succession has the power of the keys of the kingdom to bind and loose, and even to save. Salvation is deposited in the Roman priesthood and dispensed through the sacraments. The sacraments are effectual ex opere operato, meaning the subjective condition of the priest or the recipient does not matter. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that there is no salvation outside of the priesthoods mediatorial function, and no person by grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ may approach the Father with confidence! B. PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE MEDIVAL PERIOD By the successive centuries, the Roman Catholic hierarchy and other religious groups make a sharp distinction between the laity and the clergy. Such distinction was foreign to the early church where the ultimate authority in ministry traces back to the risen Lord. Along with the structural hierarchy is the sacrament of ordination. The church in Rome imposes the sacrament of ordination that results in the marked separation between the clergy and the laity.  [22]  Christianity had been plagued with it ever since. More and more the church began to structure itself on the basis of the former Levitical order, rather than on the purely New Testament idea of each man is a priest perspective. The change was slow and evolutionary, but pastors gradually came to be called priests and the believers laity. The communion table became an altar and the elements a sacrifice. At the dawn of the Reformation Era, the institutionalized church already would have two major distinguished bodies within the community of believers: the clergy and laity. The status lay people, both in principle and in practice, would not only subordinate to the priests, but also widens the gap between clergy and laity. The gap became synonymous with the sacred and the profane.  [23]   But godly men such as Peter Waldo, John Wyclif and John Hus saw the distinct difference and distance between the clergy and laity. They didnt like it, for it was in opposition to the teachings of the New Testament. Until the dramatic impact of the Protestant Reformation, these smaller movements had little pervasive influence.  [24]   C. PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS IN THE REFORMATION ERA During the Reformation era the concept of the priesthood of all believers became very contentious within the structures of the Institutional church. The Reformation era provides a framework in tracing the concept of the priesthood of all believers. An elucidation on how Martin Luther formulated the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers will be dealt with in the pages to follow. The concept that all who believe in Christ are priests occurred to Luther after he became convinced that Scripture was the only authority for a Christian. As he studied the Bible, especially Pauls Epistle to the Romans, he discovered that in and through Jesus Christ a believer possessed the righteousness of God, and therefore, immediate access to God without the mediation of an arrogant priesthood. Thus, the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers is a sequel to the doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone. Those who are clothed in the perfect righteousness of God are welcome in the presence of God. No Christian needs a pontiff, meaning a bridge builder, because Jesus Christ alone is the way to the Father. There were other efforts at reforming the Catholic Church, seeking to bring it back to a more biblical posture, but they all fell short of their goal. It was not until such reforming seeds germinated in a favorable political climate that fruit would be born. The date was October 31, 1517. The place was Wittenberg, Germany. An obscure priest named Martin Luther nailed his grievances to the church door, the Reformation was born. A number of changes were called for by this bold, imaginative priest, but at the very core of the Reformation was the conviction that all believers are priests of the living God. He felt that all believers had the right and responsibility to study Gods Word, involve themselves in the ministry, make confession to God on their own, and even administer the sacraments.  [25]   What had started in 1517 as a protest against indulgences by an unknown monk, developed in 1520 into an irreconcilable conflict dividing the Western Church. The three treatises of To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, and The Freedom of a Christian are the heart of Luthers protest against the church of his day. The first was written in August, the second in October, and third in November. In great part, Luthers tract is a catalog of the deplorable state of Christendom. The pope exalts himself over secular rulers as well as over the church, and lives in unconscionable luxury. Rome is a moral cesspool where licenses to live in open debauchery can be bought and sold. The Church has become a machine for making money, and the popes henchmen, having bled Italy dry, have now turned their attention to Germany. Because of their inability to live up to the arbitrary rule of celibacy, many pious priests keep wives, yet do so secretly and with a bad conscience. The universities ignore the Bible and lecture on commentaries, and on commentaries on commentaries. The common people are ignorant even of basic Christianity.  [26]  In such a situation, Luther did write his treatises. Primarily, his first treatise of To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation occupied the central theme of the priesthood of all believers. Here it is better to examine the background that led Martin Luther to raise the concept of priesthood of all believers. 1. To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation a) Priesthood of All Believers As Social Implication In his first treatise of To the Christian Nobility of the German Nation the concept of priesthood of all believers has social, ecclesiastical and spiritual implications. At the dawn of the Reformation era, the institutionalized church already would have two major distinguished bodies within the community of believers such as clergy and laity. Socially, he accepted the context of western Christianity, where temporal rulers belong to the body of Christendom. Within the Christian social order, the rulers are ordained of God to punish evildoers and protect those who do good. When pressed by the temporal power the Romanists have made decrees and declared that the temporal power had no jurisdiction over them, but that, on the contrary, the spiritual power is above the temporal.  [27]   Luther argues against the medieval division between the temporal and the church authorities and their separate jurisdictions in all matters. First of all, he attacked the social distinction that emphasized by the Romanists, It is pure invention that pope, bishop, priests, and monks are called the spiritual estate while princes, lords, artisans, and farmers are called the temporal estate. This is indeed a piece of deceit and hypocrisy. Yet no one need be intimidated by it, and for this reason: all Christians are truly of the spiritual estate, and there is no difference among them except that of office.  [28]   He maintains that all Christians are equally Christian so that none is superior to any other as far possessing what is essential to the church, because we all have one baptism, one gospel, one faith, are all Christians alike; for baptism, gospel, and faith alone make us spiritual and a Christian people.  [29]   Relying upon 1Corinthians 12:12-13, which describes the Church as the body of Christ and each member a part of that body, Luther acknowledges differences between Christians, not as questions of status, however, but as occasions for service to others. All are not the same in what God has given them to do, but they are all the same in what God has given them to be in the Church, viz., His very own people. All Christians, therefore, have the same status. By quoting 1Peter 2:9 and Rev. 5:9-10, Luther describes that status as priest and ascribes it to every Christian, As far as that goes, we are all consecrated priests through baptism.  [30]  So what differentiates Christians is simply the work that God has given them to do: There is no true, basic difference between laymen and priests, prices and bishops, between religious and secular, except for the sake of office and work, but not for the same of status. They are all of the spiritual estate, al are truly priests, bishops, and popes  [31]   As part of the divine economy, God has given to each Christian a particular calling in this life whereby he serves others, Everyone must benefit and serve every other by means of his own work or office so that in this way many kinds of work may be done for the bodily and spiritual welfare of the community, just as all the members of the body serve one another (1Cor.12:14-26).  [32]   As examples of such vocations in the body of Christ, Luther mentions cobblers, smiths, peasants, and temporal authorities besides the clergy. But what is noteworthy about the last, those who have as their vocation the administration of the Word of God and Sacraments,  [33]  is that they are exercising an authority that belongs in the first instance to every Christian. For besides designating ones status before God, Luthers concept of the priesthood of believers also includes spiritual power in the church. b) Priesthood of All Believers as Ecclesiastical Implication Luther rejects ecclesiastically, the clergys monopoly on interpreting Scripture. He attacks the second wall of Romanists that only the pope may interpret the Scripture, determining correct doctrine, forgiving sins, and exercising discipline. There is no Scriptural warrant at all for the claim that only the pope may interpret the Bible. Here Luther clarifies the illusion that some of the Romanists claim of the power that was given to St. Peter. Although they allege that this power was given to St. Peter when the keys were given him, it is clear enough that the key were not given to Peter alone but to the whole community. Further, the keys were not ordained for doctrine or government, but only for the binding or loosing of sin.  [34]   As handlers of Scripture the Romanists are manifestly incompetent, and this makes their claim to hold a monopoly on biblical interpretation absurd. The Romanists must admit that there are among us good Christians who have the true faith, spirit, understanding, word, and mind of Christ. Luthers main point is that the Pope isnt the only person able to read the scriptures. He writes, Has not the Pope often erred? Here Luther implies that the Pope isnt God, and that he makes mistakes.  [35]  The Pope, therefore, can misinterpret the Bible. Luther shows that the Pope is like everyone else, so therefore others can interpret the scriptures as well. Luther then uses the Bible as a way to prove the second wall wrong. Luther quotes Christs words, And they shall be all taught of God(St. John vi. 45). Everyone should be able to interpret the scriptures and be taught of God, without the Popes help. Furthermore he questions, Besides, if we are all priests, as was said above, and all have one faith, one gospel, one sacrament, why should we not also have the power to test and judge what is right or wrong in matters of faith? What becomes of Pauls words in 1Corinthians 2:15, A spiritual man judges all things, yet he is judged by no one? And 2Corinthians 4:13, We all have one spirit of faith? Why, then, should not we perceive what is consistent with faith and what is not, just as well as an unbelieving pope does?  [36]   Even more, Luther attacks the third wall of Romanists. He argues that there is no basis either in the nature of a Christian society or in Scripture for the Romanists refusal to call a council. Luther brings up that St. Peter wasnt the only person to call a council: Thus we read in Acts 15 that the council of the Apostles was not called by St. Peter, but by all the Apostles and the elders.  [37]  Also, nowhere in the scriptures does it say that the Pope is allowed to call a council by himself. Therefore their threats can be safely ignored, and a council should be called without delay to deal with a long list of abuses in the Church. Ordinary people and temporal authorities have the right and duty to do this, not only by virtue of their status as kings and priests before God, but because the crisis in the Church demands it. Would it not be unnatural if a fire broke out in a city and everybody were to stand by and let it burn on and on and consume everything that could burn because nobody had the authority of the mayor, or because, perhaps, the fire broke out in the mayors house? à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦How much more should this be done in the spiritual city of Christ if a fire of offense breaks out, whether in the papal government, or anywhere else?  [38]   Therefore, Luther concludes that it is the duty of every Christian in the Church as having the responsibility of priesthood of all believers; he has to espouse the cause of the faith, to understand and defend it, and to denounce every error. c) Priesthood of All Believers as Spiritual Implication Luther declares that since we have one baptism, one gospel one faith, and are all Christians alike; for baptism, gospel, and faith alone make us spiritual and a Christian people. He quotes 1Peter 2:9, But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, Gods special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. Yet all are alike consecrated priests, everyone must benefit and serve every other by means of his own work or office so that in this way many kinds of work may be done for the bodily and spiritual welfare of the community, just as all the members of the body serve one another. Mainly all should share the three priestly functions such as prayer intercede with God on behalf of others, proclamation speak the gospel sharing it with the neighbor, and sacrifice living a cross-centered and servant oriented life. Since the Church is in a state of crisis and someone has to act. The temporal authorities and ordinary lay people can and should do so because there are no inherently unspiritual vocations, because all Christians in all vocations are kings and priests, and because the deplorable state of the Church is the concern of every Christian. 2. The Babylonian Captivity of the Church Nevertheless, the second treatise of Luther, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church also has the influence of the idea of priesthood of all believers. In this treatise, he discusses and dismantles the medieval sacramental system. In a measured but powerful way, Luther subjects each of the seven medieval sacraments such as baptism, Eucharist, penance, confirmation, marriage, ordination, and extreme unction to the critique of Gods Word and concludes that there are, strictly speaking, but two sacraments in the church of God baptism and the bread ( Eucharist). For only in these two do we find both the divinely instituted sign and the promise of forgiveness of sins  [39]   Not surprisingly, in his di

Hunger in Richard Wrights Black Boy Essay example -- Wright Black Boy

Hunger in Black Boy   Ã‚   In the troubled world in which we live in, it is almost impossible not to find someone who is experiencing hunger in any one of its forms. Whether it is for food, for knowledge, or for love, hunger is everywhere and it mercilessly attacks anyone, young or old, black or white. In Richard Wright's autobiography, Black Boy, Wright suffers hunger for love, hunger for knowledge, and hunger for what he believes is right. A constant need for love and care develops in Richard when he is young. One of the first major events that occur to Richard during his autobiography is the abandonment by his father. As soon as his father leaves him and his mother, Richard begins to be deprived of the love he needs most not only from his father, but also from his relatives, which is evident as he begins to move in with some of them. The only real love and care he receives comes from his mother who stays with him and tries to care for him as much as possible. When he is left at an Orphan Home by his mother while she is working to support her kids, she is allowed to see her children only a minimum of times and when she does come to see him, he says, "I begged my mother to take me away [...] she left and my heart sank" (29). By this quote, Richard shows he definitely needs love and attention from the only source he has of it left: his mother. This is especially obvious because he is being deprived of this lo ve so he does not take it for granted like most other people do, and when he gets some, he appreciates and values it more. Richard's possession of love is especially evident when he attends church with his mother. The preacher begins to persuade the mothers in the crowd to take their children into ... ...s for him by driving him to work (Proverbs 16:26), Richard's hunger drives him to continue "laboring" to reach his dreams.    Works Cited and Consulted: Appiah, K. A. and Henry Louis Gates, Jr., eds.   Richard Wright: Critical Perspectives Past and Present.   New York: Amistad Press, 1993. Bloom, Harold, ed. Modern Critical Interpretations. New York: Chelsea, 1988. Bone, Robert.   "Richard Wright."   Scribner's American Writers: A Collection of Literary Biographies. Vol. 4.   New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1974.   McCall, Dan.   "Wright's American Hunger."   Appiah 259-268. Skerrett, Joseph T., Jr. "Wright and the Making of Black Boy." in Richard Wright's Black Boy:   Modern Critical Interpretations.   New York: Chelsea House, 1988. Wright, Richard.   Black Boy.   Ed. Ellen Wright.   New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 1993. Hunger in Richard Wright's Black Boy Essay example -- Wright Black Boy Hunger in Black Boy   Ã‚   In the troubled world in which we live in, it is almost impossible not to find someone who is experiencing hunger in any one of its forms. Whether it is for food, for knowledge, or for love, hunger is everywhere and it mercilessly attacks anyone, young or old, black or white. In Richard Wright's autobiography, Black Boy, Wright suffers hunger for love, hunger for knowledge, and hunger for what he believes is right. A constant need for love and care develops in Richard when he is young. One of the first major events that occur to Richard during his autobiography is the abandonment by his father. As soon as his father leaves him and his mother, Richard begins to be deprived of the love he needs most not only from his father, but also from his relatives, which is evident as he begins to move in with some of them. The only real love and care he receives comes from his mother who stays with him and tries to care for him as much as possible. When he is left at an Orphan Home by his mother while she is working to support her kids, she is allowed to see her children only a minimum of times and when she does come to see him, he says, "I begged my mother to take me away [...] she left and my heart sank" (29). By this quote, Richard shows he definitely needs love and attention from the only source he has of it left: his mother. This is especially obvious because he is being deprived of this lo ve so he does not take it for granted like most other people do, and when he gets some, he appreciates and values it more. Richard's possession of love is especially evident when he attends church with his mother. The preacher begins to persuade the mothers in the crowd to take their children into ... ...s for him by driving him to work (Proverbs 16:26), Richard's hunger drives him to continue "laboring" to reach his dreams.    Works Cited and Consulted: Appiah, K. A. and Henry Louis Gates, Jr., eds.   Richard Wright: Critical Perspectives Past and Present.   New York: Amistad Press, 1993. Bloom, Harold, ed. Modern Critical Interpretations. New York: Chelsea, 1988. Bone, Robert.   "Richard Wright."   Scribner's American Writers: A Collection of Literary Biographies. Vol. 4.   New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1974.   McCall, Dan.   "Wright's American Hunger."   Appiah 259-268. Skerrett, Joseph T., Jr. "Wright and the Making of Black Boy." in Richard Wright's Black Boy:   Modern Critical Interpretations.   New York: Chelsea House, 1988. Wright, Richard.   Black Boy.   Ed. Ellen Wright.   New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 1993.

White Noise Essay -- Literary Analysis, Don DeLillo

In Don DeLillo’s eighth novel: White Noise, warmly accepted by critiques, the author exposes, that the money gained colossal meaning during our time, plunging down other values like freedom of customer choice and respect for shoppers. In his work of fiction he illustrates how current world of commerce impacts our minds by manipulating our decisions, and also he indicates that a human nature demonstrates immense vulnerability for such attack. Moreover the ubiquitous commercials lead us to desire of having things we never tried before, to see things not worth seeing, to buy stuff we really do not need. The novelist tries to open our eyes to identify and understand how works this commercial destructive mechanism. There are plenty of commerce techniques, which lead customers to make a certain selection, to convince them to buy a product. Sometimes those techniques are so forceful that may radically change our opinion. One of the very first scenes shows us a picture of the family eating lunch. DeLillo focuses our attention on how packaged is the food on the table: â€Å"open cartons, crumpled tinfoil, shiny bags of potato chips, bowls of past substances covered with plastic wrap, flip-top rings and twist ties†(7). There are a lot of things, but I would say: lack of food. From Babette, current Jack’s wife, who prepared the meal, we hear, that the matter of fact, she wanted them to eat something totally different. Farther she is critiqued by her teenager daughters: Denise and Steffie for her bad taste: †She keeps buying that [food]. But she never eats it† (7). How is it, that Babette, who picks the food, makes so horrific purchases? She is the brightest example of someon e, who stopped to think independently, and got attracted to shiny packa... ...ldings with zillion products we can select from. There must be a place where we can get the goods, it is fantastic that we also can relax, listen music, meet a friend, and enjoy ourselves there. However we, the clients must be aware of the fact, that those places are gigantic, war arenas where our minds are under siege, where our brains may be attacked by subconscious contents, that those palaces are really full of hidden suggestion traps. This is the full package. Don DeLillo in his novel states, that we easily become victims of massive number of commercials, and salesmen, whose job is to guide us â€Å"to endless well-being† (83). From the well-trained specialist we hear: what we want to wear, eat, listen, read, and this is the time when we truthfully die. We die as a separate, unique, valuable unit, in order to become subscriber to the â€Å"noises from the tiers† (84).

Folk Art

Authors wanted to how their pride in their culture by strengthening their identity as a black insist dead of imitating the way whites wrote. The Creation states,† God thought and thought, till he t Hough: I'll make me a man! † This is an example Of an author using dialect to show their pride f or their culture. Homesick Blues states, â€Å"Homesick blues, Laid, ‘S a terrible thing to have. † HTH s quote also shows pride in his culture because of the fact that he is writing about being h mommies using dialect. Black Authors would often criticize those who mimicked white literature.The eye believed they could show pride by continuing to speak and write in African American dialect in order to celebrate the lives of African Americans. While some authors though writing n their own dialect was not traditional, African Americans began writing folk art. This raise d awareness of the culture and enabled authors to write their story as slaves in their own dial etc. Lon gs Hughes once said,† no great poet has ever been afraid Of being hi myself. † He shares that opinion with other authors who illustrate folk art.These writers the ought the best ay to show racial pride was to create folk art. Homesick Blues states,†Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ Look in' for a box car to roll me to De South†. This excerpt shows the author's love for him home in t he south just like any average man would. Pop' Boy Blues states, † when was home De Sunshine seemed like gold. Since came up North De whole damn world's turned cold. † This is another ere example of an average everyday man missing his homeland and being treated differently in an unfamiliar place. The Great Migration was the moving of African Americans from the South to the North.They opted moving would leave racial discrimination in the south and hoped to fin d new opportunities up North. Harlem population Of African Americans rose from 1 O percent in 191 0, to 98 percent in 1950. This heighten ed the number of black owned buss nesses making Harlem a symbol of African American self sufficiency. Thus creating a time of great racial pride for African Americans. Their pride in the culture then became a major t home in their art and poetry. From then on in order to end racial discrimination, black artists b Egan creating high and folk art.