The New Testament concept expressed in words attributed to Jesus, which clearly conveys the idea that a key to salvation is caring for those who are hungry, naked, etc., makes me think that Jesus would support the idea that those of us who are "among the more fortunate" should share our wealth with those who are "among the less fortunate."

Based on personal experience as a father of three daughters who by birth were half sisters and whose birth parents were just simply incompetent parents, I conclude that any person’s ability is largely inherited and that those of us who are gifted can lay no claim to that as anything we earned. We were lucky. A logical consequence of that is that we should share our wealth with others who are "less fortunate."

This would be termed "socialism" by those on the right, today.

However, discussions about "Christian morality" by "Christians" tend to skirt this basic tenet of Christianity. Many "Christians" seem to become indignant about the sexual weaknesses of Bill Clinton in his escapades with Monica Lewinsky, but seem to accept the idea that "taxpayers" should not have to share our wealth with those who are less fortunate.

What rubbish and stupidity and blindness!

I think Jesus would not buy this rubbish! Jesus would pick up a whip and drive persons with that insensitive view out of his sight.

Mike Hayes
Springfield, IL

I read the interview between Julie Wortman and Walter Bruggemann [TW 11/02] and was struck by the evasiveness of Bruggemann. Especially striking was the response to Julie’s question: "Is it your experience that Scripture is the chief authority for moderate Christians and is it the chief authority for you?" His answer: "The answer to both of these is yes. It is the chief authority for moderates and it is the chief authority to me as long as one can qualify that to say that it is the chief authority when imaginatively construed in a certain interpretive trajectory."

Is this statement to be translated as "as long as it agrees with what I believe"?

Then he was asked if practitioners of LBGT are sinners. Answer: "We are all sinners."

Another instance of evasive circumlocution. I think that theologians have the responsibility to be honest in their beliefs.

Raymond Ayoub
State College, PA

In the January/February issue of The Witness, on page 13, the Institute for Religion and Democracy (IRD) is erroneously described as both conservative and liberal. I feel sure that this is an editing or typing error, but it surely needs to be corrected. The IRD is so dangerous that I hope you will print a much more detailed article about their organized plans to destroy the existing Episcopal, Presbyterian and United Methodist denominations. In the same issue, Ray Gaston’s excellent gospel-grounded call to faith-based worship/action, "Time to Resist," is one of the best I have seen.

Dotty Dale
Bellingham, WA
[Ed. note: A BIG proofing error, for which The Witness’ staff repents!]

I always enjoy "Louie’s Index," being something of a statistics/trivia fan myself. One quibble with his Index that appears in the December 2002 issue of The Witness: Costa Rica was actually a diocese of ECUSA until 1976, when the bishop (Tony Ramos) submitted his resignation to the HOB and the World Mission standing commission recommended extra-provincial status for the diocese. (Curiously, however, I find no actual resolution approved by the 1976 General Convention, other than the acceptance of the bishop’s resignation.) See the 1976 Journal of the General Convention: pp. B-160 and AA-236.

Patrick Mauney
New York, NY

I’m writing in response to a November 2002 essay titled, "What Does It Mean for the Church to Give Its Blessing?" identified as "prepared by the Claiming the Blessing theology committee." My book, For Fidelity: How Intimacy and Commitment Enrich Our Lives, is identified as one of the sources for this essay, perhaps because I discuss the concept of blessing with some care in the last chapter. I both enjoyed and admired the ways in which my own thinking was both incorporated and significantly developed in this essay, and I hope you might have some way to let the committee know that. I especially liked the connections made to Eucharist and to baptism, and how blessing and justice are brought together. That’s really great work! And it’s fun to feel that I’m part of a conversation.

Catherine M. Wallace
Lilly Endowment Writer in Residence
Seabury Western Theological Seminary
Chicago, IL