James M. Redwine

Jesus

Tribal Court

by Leave a Comment

Chief Joseph

After forty years of serving as a judge in the white man’s courts I was recently honored to be asked to serve as a Special Judge by appointment of the Court of Appeals of the Stockbridge-Munsee Community of the Mohican Nation. The appointment of an outside judge was necessary because the case involves questions of tribal membership and the regularly sitting Native American judges for the Tribe had conflicts of interest due to the judges’ personal connections to the issues.

As I had no experience with Native American law, I had to first familiarize myself with the particular Tribe’s particular Constitution, procedural rules and statutes that applied to my assigned case. What I found was the bedrock issues for the Indian judicial system are remarkedly similar to the legal system I learned in law school and sat as a judge in. When I looked closely at tribal law, I came to the same conclusion attorney Abraham Lincoln did. Lincoln said the primary purpose of all courts and lawyers should be to:

“Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. As a peacemaker, the lawyer (judge) has a superior opportunity of being a good person.”

If one reads some newspaper editors or listens to cable news anchors, he or she might conclude compromise is anathema to the American body politic’s well-being. Conflict and strife with unyielding single mindedness are the watchwords for national media and federal, and many state, office holders. This way of addressing our personal and national problems seems rather discordant when a majority of Americans apparently believe their preferred law giver said:

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the children of God.”
Matthew 5:9

It is ironic that those, many of whom champion Jesus the ultimate practitioner of compromise, so often call for obstinance and conflict. I guess the concept of situational ethics passes them by.

What I discovered in researching tribal law was what legal scholars have known since the days of Socrates: all courts are here to resolve controversies. That is their only charter, not to provide fodder for the gossip mill or entertainment for the afternoon or late-night talk show crowd. Judges, whether in the white man’s legal system or the Indian’s, have one main mission, that is to help people help themselves, if they can, to make peace.

I grew up on an Indian reservation but my experience with the kids I played ball with, fought with and dated was they were just like me. Therefore, I was not surprised Native American courts had the same mission as the one I presided over in the white man’s world. On the other hand, it is comforting to think should I for some reason get caught up in a tribal legal system it will be about the same as the social system I have always known. And I am glad America is finally getting around to recognizing what should have always been the case.

The tribal law I researched reminded me of laws enacted from the times of ancient Rome, ancient Greece and English and French legal philosophers, such as John Locke and Voltaire and American Founding Fathers, such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.

Another great philosophical legal leader was Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce (1840-1904). Chief Joseph engaged in peaceful resistance until he was forced to surrender which he did based on certain representations from the white man’s government. Those representations were not honored. However, Chief Joseph upheld his end of the peace agreement and he was greatly admired as a peacemaker.

Chief Joseph’s legal philosophy is remarkedly similar to that of our earlier mentioned judge: Jesus said, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”  Chief Joseph said:

“If the white man wants to live in peace with the Indian, he can live in peace. Treat all men alike. Give them the same law.”

As a tribal judge, even if only for one case, I feel quite at home with this court mission statement from Chief Joseph.

Briefly Speaking

by Leave a Comment

I.

The Salient Issue 

One method of grappling with what are the most vital issues America must resolve is to first eliminate those issues that blur our thought process. Five years of partisan ill will have sapped our nation’s psyche. Our health and our economy have suffered as we have found it more entertaining to castigate those who disagree with our political views than to make the hard choices required to battle COVID-19 and its devastation of our society. The events of January 06, 2021 and our reactions to them will either continue us on our downward spiral, or perhaps, America can remember and apply the healing lessons from our history.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) and Gerald Ford (1918-2006) would address the January 06, 2021 attack on our Capitol Building differently. Kant, the great German legal philosopher, would hold it immoral to not require retribution against President Trump for the death and destruction that occurred after Trump’s call for a march on Congress even though President Trump had only fourteen days left to serve when the riot took place. Kant’s position on the legal duty to punish is set forth in the following example. If we envision an island society that decided to dissolve itself completely and leave the island at a time prisoners sentenced to be executed were awaiting their fate, it would be immoral to leave the island without first carrying out the executions. Kant’s rationale for this seemingly needless act was that the blood guilt of the prisoners would attach to the general society if justice was not administered. An eye for an eye would be called for according to Kant.

In contrast, President Ford invoked the wisdom and healing of Jesus when Ford issued a pardon to disgraced ex-President Richard Nixon (1913-1994) for Nixon’s role in covering up the burglary of Democratic National Committee Headquarters. Ford issued the pardon in September only one month after Nixon resigned in August 1974 to avoid impeachment. Instead of retribution, Ford chose mercy, but not just for Nixon; America needed relief too.

Of course, neither revenge nor mercy can, by definition, be perfect justice. However, when it comes to crimes against the State there are larger issues than justice for individuals. The greater good may require a more involved response. Fortunately, we have the wisdom of our Founders and the courage of such leaders as President Ford to aid us in our decision-making process. 

II.

Separation of Powers

Our Founders built our Constitution on the general theory of three equal branches of government. The events since the election on November 03, 2020 give evidence of the abiding legacy left for us in 1789. After the election the Judicial Branch rendered numerous decisions that upheld the Rule of Law. Vice President Pence in the Executive Branch has refused to use the 25th Amendment for political purposes, and the Legislative Branch has resisted attempts to usurp the will of the electorate to de-certify the Electoral College results. Our governmental framework has been stretched but has accommodated pressures from many angles.

All three branches are working together to identify and prosecute those individuals who violated our seat of government with physical destruction and death. With the cooperation of numerous law enforcement agencies and the courts, along with the laws previously enacted by our federal and state legislatures, those who brought nooses, pipe bombs and twist-ties to their pre-meditated crimes are being identified; and if probable cause to commit crimes is shown, and guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is proven using due process of law, just punishment should result. Gentle Reader, next week, if you are available, we can consider the differing treatments of individuals and the issue surrounding the legal concepts of attenuation of culpability. As to President or ex-President Trump, I respectfully submit that continuing to have our country divided about half and half concerning Donald Trump is akin to President Lincoln’s prescient declaration that a house divided against itself will not stand.

With that in mind I submit for your consideration a Gavel Gamut article I wrote right after President Ford died in which it was suggested Ford sacrificed his political career for his country in 1974. I have slightly modified the original article:

III.

Pardon Me, President Ford

(First published 08 January 2007)

President Gerald Ford died December 26, 2006. In a life filled with public service, he will always be best known for his pardon of President Nixon in 1974. President Nixon had personally chosen Gerald Ford to replace the disgraced Vice President Spiro Agnew who resigned in 1973 amid disclosures of bribery while Agnew was Governor of Maryland. Vice President Ford served under President Nixon until Nixon resigned in August of 1974. One month after Nixon resigned, President Ford issued him a full pardon for any crimes Nixon may have committed while president.

At the time, many Americans, including me, were calling for a complete investigation of the Watergate debacle and especially Nixon’s involvement in it. It was a time of a media feeding frenzy and blood in the water. President Ford took the unprecedented step of going personally before Congress and flatly stating that President Nixon and then Vice President Ford had no deal to pardon Nixon if Nixon would resign.

I recall how dubious I was when President Ford stated that he issued the pardon only to help our country to start healing from the loss of confidence caused by Watergate. Yet, after a few months I began to have second thoughts about my initial reaction to the pardon. I realized how much courage it took for President Ford to go straight into the anti-Nixon firestorm sweeping the United States. As a country, we were almost paralyzed by the partisan fighting at home and the War in Vietnam. [Insert 4 years of partisan bickering during the Trump presidency and include at least 1 year of COVID-19.] We needed a new direction and a renewed spirit in 1974 just as we do today. Surely President Ford with his twenty-two (22) years in Congress knew he was committing political suicide by not giving us our pound of flesh. Still, he put his country first. Of course, the country rewarded his sacrifice by booting him from office and electing President Jimmy Carter to replace him.

But during the campaign of 1976, when President Ford came to Evansville, Indiana on April the 23rd, I took our son, Jim, out of school and we went to the Downtown Walkway to see the man who put country above self. For while William Shakespeare almost always got his character analysis right, when it comes to President Ford, “The good he did lives after him.” Julius Caesar, Act III, sc. ii.

Even President Carter, one of America’s most courageous and best former presidents said of his erstwhile political opponent President Ford: “President Ford was one of the most admirable public servants I have ever known.” And when it came to the pardon of President Nixon, Senator Ted Kennedy, while admitting that he had severely criticized the pardon in 1974, said that he had later come to realize that:

“The pardon was an extraordinary act of courage that historians recognize was

truly in the national interest.”

Janie’s Sermon

by Leave a Comment

Janie Redwine Bartlett with Brother Jim

My sister, Jane Redwine Bartlett, is a retired psychology assistant professor and a working lay minister. She gave the following Easter message electronically. As she received some Good personal News the following week she may see that as a reward. It is a nice thought.

“Good Morning!  We gather in worship on this strangest of Easter Sundays—almost as strange as that first Easter 2000 years ago. When in your life have you ever given up so much for Lent? Forget giving up chocolate or starches or alcohol. Forget, “Don’t give something up; get out and do something good for others.” This year Lent has called for big time sacrifice.

We have given up freedom of movement, freedom of choice, jobs we love, family time around Easter ham, Mom’s brownies and colored eggs.  We also mostly gave up Shrove Tuesday Pancake Breakfasts, Maundy Thursday’s fellowship meals and Good Friday’s Stations of the Cross.

Some have given up income. Students have given up school and the important social interaction with friends, settling for parents REALLY as teachers—with results sometimes good; sometimes not so good. Many Moms and Dads have jobs or are trying to work from home. Teaching six different subjects to three different kids at three different grade levels while stirring the fried potatoes just isn’t fun.

As writer David Brooks says, we humans are social animals. We have always been stronger and served our God better when we reach out to others. Now we are cautioned against reaching out. Touch has always healed yet now touch can carry a death sentence. Because kids aren’t in school, child abuse reports have dwindled—school is about more than education; school is often the only ‘safe’ place for hungry, abused and neglected children.

Most worrisome for many of us is the giving up of our sense of safety and security—the, silent, unseen Covid 19 virus may be insidiously waiting just around the next corner or next aisle, not only for us but more importantly for one or more of our loved ones or friends. We may still have a job but are waiting for another round of layoffs. Almost 20 million unemployed boggles our minds as do the miles and miles of bread lines.

When shopping for groceries or taking a walk in the park turns in to a possible contamination of self or others, our world is rocked. Few of us have ever experienced such restrictions, and most of us have not experienced such pernicious fear or anxiety. When all has passed, what will our nation and our world resemble? Will we recognize those things we hold dear or will they have been forever changed? How about each of us? How are we being changed by this pandemic?

Today’s scripture finds Jesus’ disciples in a very similar situation. Their leader has been crucified, killed, buried. Roman and Jewish authorities are attempting to herd and capture them. They are frightened, hiding and fearing what will come next.

Hear the words from John 20: 1-18. As you listen, put yourself in the place of each character—Jesus, the Angels, Peter, John, Mary. How do you think each was feeling? Just as everyone around us now is reacting differently to what is going on, Mary, Peter, John and the others each react differently to Jesus’ arrest, trial, crucifixion and the empty tomb. Some with awe; some with fear; some with disbelief, some with action.

As observant Jews, the disciples and faithful followers of Jesus had to leave his body unattended until the next day or bury him quickly.  Two of the Sanhedrin took charge—both wealthy enough to receive favors from their fellow Sanhedrin and from Pilate, Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. I wonder if they were present for Jesus’ trial and chose not to speak?  What gave them courage now, these secret followers, to claim the body of this homeless, itinerant carpenter?

Peter fearfully and shamefully denied he was a follower of Jesus’, yet he almost beats John to the tomb on that first Easter Sunday morning and as the story plays out is still seen as a leader.  Mary, grieving deeply over this man who accepted her with all her wrongdoing, came to anoint Jesus’ body, but finds him missing. Mary rushes to tell Peter and John then returns to linger and mourn her loss.  John, the disciple who the Bible tells us,” Jesus loved”, raced Peter to the tomb– John’s ability to beat Peter at this race might have something to do with John’s youth. But apparently John didn’t have the nerve to enter the tomb, leaving that to Peter. When they saw the grave cloths were not disturbed but folded neatly, they were amazed.

Fear that the Roman or Jewish leaders had stolen Jesus’ body coupled with fear of what was going to happen in this new world environment had to be as disturbing as our fears of what our new world environment offers. As Christians we celebrate Easter as a day of Life Breaking Death—we rejoice over the renewal and rejuvenation of all things that have been lost. What a relevant celebration for this scary time.

Just as Mary didn’t recognize Jesus until he called her name, we too have difficulty seeing God and Jesus in the midst of this pandemic—particularly since we not only have to winnow out what is true and right and good, but because we must discard so much misinformation and despair. As Mr. Roger’s said when asked what you tell children to do in times of disaster or despair, “You look for the helpers. Keep your eye on the helpers.”

Excellent advice for all ages. I would say to you that God is in our midst, despite our inability to see God’s continual creating. In moments of doubt and confusion, darkness and struggle, fear and anxiety, it is normal for even faithful Christians to fail to see God, to find his loving goodness in the midst of despair.

If we remember our mandate to “Love One Another as Jesus Loved,” we can see sparks of hope, in the dainty pink tulips I discovered on my front porch, in the effort of my eldest brother who called to play, “The Holy City” on his saxophone for his siblings on National Sibling Day, in caring neighbors who bring soup and cinnamon rolls, in parents and teachers working together; in research scientists searching for a cure, in medical personnel who continue to treat Covid 19 patients even at risk of their health, in the RV’s for MD’s program New Song is investigating—we have the land and facilities; hopefully we can provide a service.

The fear and pain are huge right now. The message of Easter is that we are called to act in large and small ways to mitigate that pain wherever we can, including not encouraging others to gather—even in small groups.

The church has never been about the building but about our individual relationship with God and with one another. We will continue to Seek God, Create Community and Serve Humanity—that’s who we are.

The message of the empty cross and the empty tomb is that Jesus lives. As long as he lives within our hearts, as long as we continue to step up and serve others, being safe and cautious as we push through our fears, being faithful to our calling to love as Jesus loved, Easter may be celebrated differently; Easter might feel strange; but we each can come out of this quarantined, physically distanced world more connected, more loving, more kind and assured that God is alive, God is in our midst. He has risen; he has risen indeed.”

Hang Together Or Separately

by 1 Comment

You may already know Peg and I bought a log cabin in Osage County, Oklahoma. Our home in Posey County, Indiana is a converted barn with 4,000 square feet of finished space and our barn/home also has a barn. Our cabin in Oklahoma is 2,000 square feet and we had to add a barn. Four thousand square feet of stuff does not smoothly fit in 2,000 square feet of space. However, my suggestion to Peg that we simply leave everything but our toothbrushes was not kindly received. Ergo, we are in the process of triage. I have learned the hard way to not suggest which items are disposable. My role is to take down and re-hang not to judge what should be preserved.

Benjamin Franklin and his wife, Deborah, lived much of their married life separated by the Atlantic Ocean as Ben served as Minister to France while Deborah refused to accompany him. But they managed to raise three children and stay married for many years. I suspect their marital success was in large part due to staying put in one house most of their marriage. When Ben’s famous quote, “We must hang together or we will surely hang separately”, is cited most people probably assume Ben was talking about our Revolution from Great Britain. I propose he was giving marital advice. You know Ben was famous and got rich for his advice column Poor Richard’s Almanac. Why not accept that he was an early Ann Landers?

What I think Ben meant was, if you and your spouse wish to avoid all out warfare, you should never engage in moving and especially not in what should be hung and where. For example, when I was sixteen my parents moved one block to a different house. Our family had three pictures on the walls. One was a black and white 8” x 10” photograph of our immediate family and the other two were Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper (not the original) and some European’s creation of a blond-haired Jesus. All three were taken down by my mother and put back up by my father. No argument, no stress.

On the other hand, Peg and I have countless photos of us, of our three kids and their spouses, of our seven grandkids, some of whom already have spouses, and one great-grand kid. We have knickknacks from family vacations, from gifts and from school projects. Every wall in our Indiana home/barn is festooned with something. And Peg demands all of it must be hung in our much smaller Oklahoma cabin. Of course all our furniture has to be carefully placed somewhere too. Well, you see the dilemma.

We are gingerly adjusting to this new strain of “Cabin Fever”, but there is a constant simmering of strife just below the lip-biting surface. My position is usually reasoned and rational, but Peg’s is often influenced by emotion. For example, yesterday we spent over an hour negotiating if a forty-pound mirror should be saved and, if so, where would it go? Peg’s position was it is a family heirloom and my response about it not being from my side of the family was not charitably received. The mirror now hangs in its new location.

Peg and I have now made nine trips to the cabin with items crammed onto a trailer and in a car (SUV) and a pickup. We have about two more trips to go. Each trip takes about twelve hours each way and requires a day to load and another day to unload. The nitty gritty of what goes where will consume the remainder of our lives and marriage.

Now, if you Gentle Reader, wish to be a modern day Ben Franklin marriage saver, feel free to give us a hand and bring a truck!

 

Do We Want To Fool Mother Nature?

by Leave a Comment

China’s National Science Review reported in March 2019 that Bing Su of the Kunming Institute of Zoology has inserted human genes into monkeys. His apparent goal was to investigate how the brains of early primates developed along different paths with monkeys remaining in the trees and Homo sapiens progressing to the Internet.

Chinese scientist He Jiankui while at the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, China claims to have modified the genome, the DNA, of twin female humans in an attempt to preempt the possibility of them someday contracting the HIV virus.

Both of these researchers dealt with DNA and CRISPR. DNA is familiarly known as deoxyribonucleric acid and CRISPR is an acronym for clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats. The genome is the famous Double Helix discovered by James Watson and Francis Crick in 1953. DNA is our 23 pairs of intertwined chromosomes that make us us. CRISPR is the DNA from viruses that might protect us from other viruses such as HIV.

Gentle Reader, if I were you I would not rely upon this exposition of biological knowledge from me for answers you may wish some paid tutor to give on your child’s SAT test. Please remember, I was an English major.

Instead of science, let’s you and I turn to literature for our analysis of genetic engineering. We can start at the beginning. In Genesis, that was written about 400 BC if we look to the Dead Sea Scrolls for a date, Yahweh was doing a little human manipulation when he decided Adam needed a companion. The DNA from Adam’s rib was used to create Eve. The Bible does not explain why two Adams was not the result. However, blissful ignorance was the life these humans led until fruit from the Tree of Knowledge was eaten. Some may think it’s been all downhill since.

About 300 years before Adam and Eve those marvelous Greeks were writing about Achilles who was the product of a human, Peleus, and the immortal nymph, Thetis. This mixing of DNA’s of differing species helped lead to the sack of Troy.

Of course, Jesus, about 2,000 years ago, was a similar product of the human Mary and a god who used genetic merging to create a Prince of Peace. To my way of thinking this was evidence there may be some true benefit to Mankind from such genomitry.

As for me, I could support the manipulation of human genetics if we could create drivers who would not clog up the passing lane and who could survive at least a few moments without a cell phone stuck in their ear. Also, as a husband, could we not embed in wives a gene that allows for beer and football instead of yard work?

Merry Christmas to Us

by Leave a Comment

If the message of Christmas were simply gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh, etc., etc., it would have died out about as unceremoniously as the current stock market. Therefore, we should probably consider if there are other possibilities.

When the Jews were conquered by the Romans they reacted as most oppressed people would. Their cultural myths concentrated on deliverance. In general, deliverance from an omnipotent force can take three approaches: armed rebellion; assimilation; and/or peaceful coexistence.

To some of the Hebrews their hoped-for messiah would be a warrior who would throw off the Roman rule. To others the approach was more of total capitulation. But for many the thought was a Prince of Peace would provide the best hope. To fight Rome, as the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. showed, was to court annihilation. As the Jewish historian Josephus Flavius chronicled, revolt by the Jews brought total devastation to their society.

On the other hand, the Romans and Jews of that time did not appear to be interested in peaceful coexistence except upon terms set by Rome. That left real deliverance from bondage for the Jewish people to be more metaphysical, that is, through philosophy not armed resistance. And it took 2,000 years, the horrors of WWII and the benevolence of the world’s new Rome, the United States of America, before Jewish self-determination could be realized. Still true peace as called for by Jesus is elusive. The Middle East continues to be an area where armed rebellion is both ubiquitous and futile.

Perhaps we should give the true message of Christmas a chance. I know President Trump has his faults and I carry no brief for much of what our government does in our name. However, to withdraw from foreign conflicts that simply kill thousands, destroy cultures and cost trillions appears to me to be the course Jesus would call for. Merry Christmas and welcome home to our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and wherever else we are engulfed in endless counterproductive conflicts. And if we really are the new Rome maybe we should learn from the military fiascoes of that ancient one.

The debacle on Wall Street might best be addressed not by quarrelling over interest rates but by investing our treasure in ourselves instead of squandering it in the vain pursuit of a Pax Americana.