EASTER THE BUDGIE

Easter Sunday was a bright, warm day in Toronto. Cathy and I had driven in from Belleville after Easter services. We were walking south on Sherbourne Street -- along with Cathy's brother Luke and Ruby the dog. Just south of Wellesley Cathy pointed to a spot of green on the far side of the roadway. "What is that? I think I saw it move." The small, green fluttering object was positioned on the outer edge of the bike lane in danger of being squashed under the wheels of an SUV.

Cathy, donning her pet rescue cape, flew across the highway to scoop up what we now saw as a budgie on the loose. Cathy has a history of saving small animals on holy days. Most memorable was Christmas Eve 2007 when she heard whimpering coming from beneath her parked car. It was 30 degree below zero weather up in Massey. Her breath rose in clouds above her head as she went down on her hands and knees to peer under the car. She recognized that the small, shaking bundle was a puppy. The puppy found a home with a loving family that night. That was a suitable Christmas miracle.

Back to the budgie. The forces of good in the person of Cathy and Luke have posted a lost budgie notice on Craig's List, purchased a cage, bird food and toys and visited the local bird veterinarian -- all in a day and a half. "Easter" the budgie is now chirping happily in an apartment above Sherbourne Street. He is warm and protected and socializing nicely with the inhabitants of the apartment. Ruby the dog has made no comment on the matter.

This is Cathy's "Easter" miracle for 2011.

JEFF AROTA IN MEMORY

Eulogy for Jeff Arota given Monday evening, April 25 in Rosar Morrison Chapel, Toronto

I am a friend of Jeff's mother Zeny. I see Jeffrey Arota through his mom's eyes. I see him with the eyes of love. I am aware that you too see him with the eyes of love -- love that recognizes the good, heals all that is broken, sings a song of thanksgiving.

I am a friend of Zeny, Jeffrey and the family. We go back to 1980s when Zeny was getting established here in Canada. Initially, she was working for a Toronto family in the domestic worker program. Zeny impressed me with her smile and her sense of humour. She was a good friend and -- don't tell other people -- she would give me free haircuts.

She was very active -- a businesswoman and successful and she was a pioneer for her family. Gradually new family members began to arrive. Over the years of the 1980s and 1990s I got to know her mother and sisters and her boy Jeffrey -- Jeff with his big, warm smile and hint of laughter in his eyes. Each time we met he would do the "mano" -- take my hand to his forehead and show me respect.

Jeffrey showed some of the best aspects of Filipino culture -- easy with others -- always ready to laugh. Like his mom, Jeff was generous and active. He was multi-talented, a carpenter, an electrician, a renovation expert and even a manicurist.

Jeff also had a special gift of song. He shared that gift to delight other people. He did not bury his talent but with the support of family and friends he grew his talent. As the years went by I would on occasion be invited to a competition in which Jeff was performing. There was always a crowd. Zeny and the whole family were there -- Jimmy and his little brother Jimzen -- being his close support. It was a marvel to watch how the little guy Jeff with the big voice grew into a performer who could give you goose-bumps with his voice -- communicate thrills of emotion in that powerful high voice. It was at times a religious experience, a voice reaching in song to the divine, sharing the power and the glory, giving glory.

Over the past couple of days, watching clips on Youtube I see the man, calbo y guapo, who loved to joke, who sang with others, let their voices and their music shine too, who was happiest making others happy. In his photos one sees the father of son Jazz and daughter Harmony who delighted in his family and children.

On his memorial Facebook page his friends tell about the love and affection, the laughter and delight that he brought into their lives. His musical friends and those who followed his performances with Yan Yon Band and all the other groups remember his renditions of "Me & Mrs. Jones," "The Midnight Hour," "Mustang Sally," "Zombie by The Cranberries" -- Jeff did those classics proud.

For those of us who believe that "all will be well, all will be well, all manner of things will be well," it makes sense that Jeff's time of dying has been in Holy Week - Semana Santa. He is a man who like Jesus was happiest sharing food and socializing with others -- a Holy Thursday person. We have sorrowed through the time of his Good Friday. His many friends and family have had occasion to pray in grief and hope. They have said that he is with the angels who sing before the throne of God. So we all know that Jeffrey is an Easter person and tomorrow we are celebrating his Resurrection mass.

May all the good memories of Jeffrey stay with you; may you always hear his voice raised in song to lift you up in your low times. May the example of his life inspire his children, the women he loved, his extended family and his good friends to live life to the fullest. We are better for the time he shared with us.

HUMAN RIGHTS FOR PALESTINIANS

For an International Support Worker it is of value to become acquainted with the role that the Palestinian issue plays in Canadian politics. After all, the "NO" to the funding of Kairos and the withdrawal of funding from other NGOs has been linked to government response to positions taken on this issue. With that thought in mind, I was happy to accept a friend's invitation to attend a presentation and discussion on Palestinian human rights.

Our group of family and friends attended the event held at the Taric Islamic Centre in North York this past Sunday evening. The panel members were the founding figures of "The Canadian Inter-Faith and Inter-Cultural Alliance for Palestinian Human Rights." The brochure describing the alliance advertised the participating groups as being "Muslim Unity," "Independent Jewish Voices," the "Canadian Arab Federation" and the "Holy Land Awareness and Action Task Group, South West Presbytery, United Church of Canada."

I am familiar with inter-faith events hosted in Christian churches and community settings.  In a different kind of experience for me -- this presentation and discussion was hosted by the Muslim community in the hall of the mosque. The presentations began a little after 7 p.m. and had to be halted for the sunset prayer at around 8 p.m. The Muslim participants went away for 10 minutes and returned looking refreshed and cheerful.

In the second half of the meeting I got an opportunity to ask a question to the panel. I inserted a short preamble leading up to my question. I explained that I had read that there has been a shift in the way Canada is being perceived on the international stage. Whereas in past Canada had been thought of as more or less an "honest broker," the Canadian government at present was considered strictly aligned with Israel -- "an attack on Israel is an attack on Canada." I had read that the perception that Canada was aligned with Israel had contributed to Canada losing a vote in the General Assembly of the UN and subsequently not gaining a seat on the Security Council.

My question was: What advantage does Canada gain from being perceived as aligned strictly with Israel on issues that might arise? Would it not be preferable to evaluate events on the facts presented?

One panelist saw this policy pattern as pleasing some Christian evangelicals, the religious right who were hoping that the extension and strengthening of Israel would lead to Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ. For another panelist it had to do with economic benefits and security ties. Military hardware and security expertise and police training were being exchanged and bonds had been built that put Canada fully in line with Israel.

I continue to be puzzled. Surely, an extreme Christian view does not dominate in Canadian Government? As well, would it really pay economically to offend African and North African states with which Canada has a higher volume of trade?

United Church panelists and my father-in-law's voice from the participants invited all present to read and to inform others concerning a powerful document -- the "Kairos Palestine Document" available from http://www.kairospalestine.ps/sites/default/Documents/English.pdf.

I have my reading to do.

Addendum: Two paragraphs from a Canadian Catholic bishop, Pierre Morissette, President of the CCCB, to Stephen Harper March 29, 2010, summarize the approach of the Canadian bishops to Israelis and Palestinians and the impact of current security restrictions:

"Dear Prime Minister:


It is the policy of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops to insist on full respect for the rights and hopes of both Israelis and Palestinians, to do all that is possible to encourage efforts for justice and peace throughout the Middle East, and to be mindful that the issues involved in the Holy Land are of vital importance for Jews and Muslims as well as for Christians – including those who for centuries have lived in what is today Israel and the Palestinian Territories, as well as the members of the Jewish, Muslim and Christian faiths around the world.

While fully respecting and endorsing the right and need of Israeli citizens to be able to live in security, our Conference is also aware that there are many people in the Middle East growing increasingly frustrated, impatient and even hostile because of various security measures imposed by the State of Israel. Thus ironically, today’s efforts to improve security may have the unintended but inevitable effect of spawning future insecurity."

TRICKLE DOWN VERSUS SOCIAL PROGRAMS

A reporter on CPAC this Friday April 15 morning laid out the contrast between Liberal and Conservative in this way. The Liberals support expansion of social programs and the Conservatives work with a trickle down economic theory.

As it see it, the contrasting approaches take shape in specific choices, for example, around immigration issues. Conservatives please the business class by increasing the number of low-paid temporary workers coming into the country. Liberals promise to increase family reunification and to unite families with grandparents.

Yes, of course both parties allow temporary workers and family reunification. It's a matter of who does more of what, where the emphasis is put. Bringing in large numbers of temporary workers has a number of results. Certain businesses benefit: the dirty work gets done at low cost. Problems arise with lack of adequate supervision of the conditions of employment. As the program unfolds and unravels there are temporary workers who do not want to be temporary and, if the experience in Europe with these worker programs tells us anything, an undocumented class of people develops. These people can be exploited by unscrupulous employers.

Bringing in extended family can have its negative side. These individuals may not be prepared to integrate quickly with the broader community. On the other hand, grandparents and other family members may add that extra dimension of support the younger family needs in order to keep together and forge ahead to success in the new environment.

An additional reflection. Another reporter in the same CPAC program commented that you couldn't put a credit card between Liberal and NDP platforms. The Liberals and the NDP are natural allies. The Conservatives, on the other hand, have no natural allies in parliament. I suppose that will mean one of two possibilities. Before the election, NDP supporters will move their votes to the Liberals or, after the election, Liberal MPs and NDP MPs will find ways of working together.

Isn't learning about politics fun?

NO NATIVE PEOPLES IN CANADA?

Are there no native peoples in Canada?  The party leaders did not talk about Aboriginal issues the past two evenings of debate. The expanding indigenous population, the majority presence in the resource rich North, the growing presence in the urban centres, the vision of Canada influenced by Aboriginal cullture means little to the politicians if there are no votes connected. John Ralston Saul speak up, please.

I beg First Nations, Inuit and Metis friends to listen to native leadership and to vote in the upcoming election. The tribes, the nations who have made the treaties, the people never conquered, have slipped back into the shadows. It is obvious from both the English and the French language debates that the politicians do not consider the first founding group a factor. For them it is about French and English only: two important languages; two kinds of people worth paying attention to (and in vile wedge politics "ethnic" groups). Nothing about Aboriginal languages, cultures, peoples.

I'm not status "Indian" nor formally Metis nor Inuit. However, I am distinctively Canadian and aware that I owe my identity to the Aboriginal peoples of this land. Yes I am proud to speak both official languages and some Ojibway (Nishnabe) language.

Let me repeat: I am one who is disappointed that in the leaders' debates there has been very little, almost nothing, concerning Aboriginal issues. The politicians think that this group does not vote and carries little political weight. Let native peoples not prove them correct in their assumptions. Aboriginal title and oversight, to be effective, entails an additional responsibility -- active political involvement. Let all people of this land stand shoulder to shoulder with native brothers and sisters, and vote for politicians who protect the vision of who we can be. Let us vote for politicians who are aware that Canada has signed onto the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

On a lighter note: searching the website for the Conservative Party I noticed that Stephen Harper likes cats. According to the site, the Harper household is a feline household. As we can all agree, there is much to be learned about a person from viewing their preferred pets. It would then make sense that the Ignatieff family home have a special disposition towards dogs. And in order to liven the debates in future I would suggest that the politicians bring their pets to the debates.

CANADA IS THE TALKING CIRCLE COUNTRY

I am looking forward to the leaders' debate this evening.  I anticipate that the debate will be intellectually stimulating -- not just because of brilliant policy analysis on the part of the leaders, but because I am approaching the debate from an angle that interests me. As I listen, I plan to evaluate the leaders in terms of my vision of what Canada is and who we are as Canadians. I understand Canada on the template of the Aboriginal "Talking Circle."

For eight years living with First Nations' people, once a month for ten months of the year, I participated in a "Talking Circle" at the Anishinabe Spiritual Centre, Espanola, Ontario. Anishinabe women and men  in ministry gathered in a large circle in a room built from the logs gathered from the forest and settled into silence. At the centre of the circle was a table with the Eagle Feather. The person in the circle who was inspired to speak took the Eagle Feather and spoke about what had happened to them in the past month. As long as that person held the feather that person spoke without interruption. When finished, the speaker passed the Eagle Feather to the left in the pattern of the circling sun and moon and the next person had opportunity to speak or to pass the feather on.

Canada is a "Talking Circle" country. The circle continuously opens to receive newcomers. We gather connected to the "Land" -- the animals, the forest, the waters and the sun and moon. There is no hierarchy in the circle except that of respect for what each has to say in a distinctive voice. Word emerges honestly from Silence. We seek consensus as we learn patience.

My vision of Canada has been influenced by my reading of John Ralston Saul's A Fair Country: Telling Truths About Canada. I am grateful that he has been able to put into words an account of who we are that makes sense. We are not primarily shaped by European culture, not a post-colonial people, not another smaller America.

Now that I think about it, Ralston Saul's notion of Canada shaped by Aboriginal patterns makes sense in the way that Jane Urquhart's novel Away makes sense to me. They both have understood that the Aboriginal world view -- the closeness to the land, the respect given to dreams, the recognition that others have inspiration distinct and special to them -- forms us as Canadians.

As I read the party platforms I am searching for the party that works with a vision of who Canadians and Canada can be. I look to see policies that promote inclusion of newcomers and respect for the Land. Tonight, as I watch the leaders, I will be listening for the Canadian voice to rise above the babble of debate.

CHURCH PEOPLE ON THE WAY TO THE ELECTION

The bulletin for St. Michael the Archangel in Belleville is handed out at the door as the congregation exits the church. I had a chance to skim it in the driveway when I reached home. The bulletin told me that the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) had prepared a set of guidelines for the 2011 Federal election. The pastor had not mentioned the guidelines in his sermon and they were not handed out at the door from which I left.

Ah, but we are in the on-line age. I went to the CCCB web-site and down-loaded the text. It is a convenient three pages with items organized under five topics. The text is designed to prepare us to question our local candidates:
1. Respect for life and human dignity: from conception to natural death
2. Building a more just society
3. The person and the family
4. Canada in the world: providing leadership for justice and peace
5. A healthy country in a healthy environment So far so good.

I decided that for this blog I would focus on the fourth topic -- "Canada in the world: providing leadership for justice and peace."

The text reads: "Believing in justice and peace includes:  Striving to reach the Millennium Development Goals established by the United Nations;  Choosing policies that promote dialogue leading to peace rather than confrontation among nations;  Working to eliminate nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons, and encouraging strict worldwide controls on the sales of small arms and personal weapons;  Honouring international treaties on human rights;  Protecting the dignity of immigrants and refugees when handling their files;  Protecting the rights of seasonal workers from abroad;  Combating business and industry practices that have little regard for workers’ rights and dignity. What do the political parties say about these issues? What positions are the candidates taking?"

I told Cathy about these Catholic guidelines and she directed my attention to an Election Kit that the United Church had distributed. I am working my way into that text. It is less a summary of issues and more a process and in-depth analysis on specific issues.

Let us take for example the Israel/Palestine issue. The closest the Catholic bishops' text gets to that politically hot-button issue is the matter of "honouring international treaties on human rights." Not a particularly direct approach. The United Church text on the other hand wades right into the fight -- taking a strong position critical of the Canadian government's recent approach to the issue: "• Canada has demonstrated double standards with its uncritical support of the Israeli government’s acts of violence against civilians, while singling out the Palestinian government for censure for acts of violence against civilians. • In voting against resolutions of the United Nations Human Rights Council condemning Israel’s violations of Palestinian human rights, Canada has also failed to live up to its obligations to uphold respect for international human rights and humanitarian law (The United Church of Canada 20 L’Église Unie du Canada Federal Election Kit 2011)."

I know that I have to look more deeply into what the Catholic bishops have to say on the Israel/Palestine issue. No doubt, not everything can be addressed in a summary list. And yes the notion of study "kit" is different than a list of "guidelines.'

Clarification can be helped by contrast. I hope to explore the apparent difference between the Catholic bishops' approach on this point and the approach of the United Church General Council.

CANADA IN DECLINE

Glorious warm Saturday and we headed over the bridge that crosses the Bay of Quinte and south down to the Sobey Mall in Picton and the opening of the Liberal office for Prince Edward County. It was a gathering of Liberal supporters, some of them transfers from the defunct Progressive Conservative party. Red colours dominated.

Peter Tinsley, the Liberal candidate, is getting more practiced and somewhat more expansive in the points he wants to make. The point Peter made that stood out for me was his contention that the Conservative government has failed to work with others nationally and internationally.

I have a sense of what Peter Tinsley was referring to. The failure nationally is evident in the acrimonious tone of the debates in the recent Parliament. Lyle Vanclief, successful Liberal candidate in previous years, M.P. for Prince Edward Hastings (1988-2004) and long-term Minister of Agriculture (1997-2003), admitted that he no longer watches CPAC. He finds that he cannot tolerate the tone of the parliamentary debates.

Vanclief's comment took me back to my recent conversation with a Jamaican-born Canadian, a retired Bank of Nova Scotia executive. The Conservative candidate, Darryl Kramp, had come to his door seeking his vote. The 86 year old former executive told Kramp that he regularly watches Question Period and informed Kramp that he would not have hired any of the past parliament for any business with which he was involved.

One might judge it fitting that a government that provoked a high level of discord among representatives fell on a vote of no confidence on the finding that the government was in contempt of Parliament.

The failure to collaborate with others internationally is evident in the decline in respect for Canada as an honest broker. The Harper government has taken a rigid stance in support of Israel. In past other governments could rely on Canada for a more even-handed approach to world events, critiquing and supporting according to specific events and established facts. This shift in behaviour in international relations and subsequent decline in Canada's reputation has resulted in Canada's loss of a seat on the U.N. Security Council. Not an important loss for those who do not support the U.N. On the other hand, for those who think that there is room for the U.N. and broad-based collaboration, convincing evidence of Canada's decline.

A long-term resident of Prince-Edward County explained to me the political situation on the County. She noted that her friends, many of them seniors, were somewhat out of touch reading mainly the local county newspapers. When it came to voting they often did what their family had always done, vote Progressive Conservative. We agreed that they should be made aware that the Progressive Conservative Party no longer existed. They have been swallowed by the Reform-based Conservative party.

WAKING UP TO THE CHANGE IN CANADIAN POLITICS

I have a sense that the political scene has changed and I am just waking up to it.

I hear Liberal companions saying that this is a historic election. This is the first time in Canada's history when a government has been found in "contempt" of Parliament. There is a battle going on here. Do we have parliamentary democracy or not?

When the Parliament was attempting to understand what was going forward with the torture of Afghan detainees, was it proper Canadian protocol for the government to prorogue (close down) Parliament? I don't think so. The government was warned by the Speaker of the house that by denying parliamentary committees access to the Afghan detainee files the government was denying parliamentary privilege. Should a government hide these matters from Parliament? I don't think so.

Electing a majority Conservative government will only give support to this shift toward rule by executive decree. It will weaken representational democracy. I say to myself: wake up John! These are important matters at stake. We are in a shift toward a style of politics familiar to my Mexican friends -- rule by presidential decree. Decisions are made and implemented without proper informed discussion and consent on the part of the elected representatives.

I had something to say about the Mexican scene in my blog "THE IMPACT OF NAFTA": "The Zapatistas understood that the implementation of NAFTA would mean the end of a communal land system that had sustained them and was protected under the Mexican Constitution of 1917. The President of Mexico in 1994, Salinas, had attempted to change the Constitution through presidential fiat; that is, without going through proper legal processes. The campesino small farmer indigenous peoples rose up to say "NO." If the Mexican state would not abide by its own Constitution and protect their interests, what were their options?"

I took a look at the Prince Edward Hastings Liberal candidate's website today. Tinsley comments: "Our Westminster model of parliamentary government has historically served Canada well.  However, as we have seen recently, it is vulnerable to abuse.  It does not have the rigid system of legal checks and balances on which, for example, the US government is based.  Ours is dependant in many ways on respect for 'conventions' and historical practices.  When faced with those who are willing to ignore those conventions, to resort to secrecy and deceit, and to flout the very will of Parliament, we are at risk as a democratic society.


By way of example, Canada does not, as a matter of legal fact, have an 'executive branch' of government such as found in the US with the President comprising a part of government quite distinct from the Congress.  However, we now have a prime minister functioning as if he is a president, but unlike the American system, in ours, President Harper can dictate the sitting schedule of Parliament for partisan political purposes.  We are at risk!"

MEXICO IN THE LIBERAL PARTY PLATFORM: QUESTIONS

Under "Renewing Partnerships in North America" in the Liberal Party Platform: "Building Canada’s relationships with Mexico is also vital. A neighbour and partner in North America, Mexico’s further success matters to Canada. We share a range of interests and opportunities including fighting protectionism, collaborating on climate change and supporting Mexico’s progress on domestic security. A Liberal government will also work with Mexico towards phasing out the visa requirement for Mexican citizens visiting Canada, while addressing Canada’s concerns regarding refugee claims" (p. 79).

Having returned from Mexico only a month ago, the country and its people are still very much on my mind. The Liberal Party platform came out yesterday, Sunday. There is a paragraph on Mexico in the section "Renewing Partnerships in North America." I am happy to see mention of Mexico and particularly happy to see the promise that when a Liberal government is in place there will be a phase out of the visa requirement for Mexicans.

A paragraph is much too brief for the potential importance Mexico has for the future of Canada and North American continent. I would want to hear more from Ignatieff, our candidate Peter Tinsley and other creators of the platform what is meant by the various "interests and opportunities" our nations share.

What is meant by the three points of interest: "fighting protectionism, collaborating on climate change and supporting Mexico's progress on domestic security"?

FIRST: Is "fighting protectionism" intended to address the American practice of not accepting Free Trade judgements when they go against American claims -- as in the softwood lumber controversy? Or is "fighting protectionism" intended to silence legitimate local concerns that environmental risks and social disruption be taken into consideration -- as in the ability of Canadian based mining companies to claim impunity in Canada for acts against Mexican citizens in their country? Witness the failure of Bill C-300.

SECOND: Is "collaborating on climate change" a platitude in place of specific action to protect and expand the remaining tropical rain forest and to facilitate alternative energy sources? Can both countries exercise discipline in the exploitation of oil and gas and reduce dependence on the petroleum industry and the petrodollar economy?

THIRD: What is meant by "supporting Mexico's progress on domestic security"? Does Canada support the effectiveness of security forces only to enable them to more efficiently suppress legitimate human rights' movements? Will the Liberal government give equivalent support to those who promote justice and human dignity on the North American continent?  [Having asked a question of Peter Tinsley on how to interpret this element in the Liberal platform his response was -- Any support for police professionalism in the "Canadian model" would also include support for human rights.]

The Liberal Party has concern for democracy, human rights, social and economic disparities here in Canada. If the concern is authentic it should not stop at our southern border. Canadians care about Mexico, winter in Mexico, marry Mexicans and have more and more trade with Mexico. Mexicans enhance the warmer dimensions of our soul.

Viva Mexico!  Viva Canada!

DEMOCRACY AT STAKE THIS ELECTION

There was an atmosphere of focused energy at the formal opening this Saturday morning of the Belleville office of the Prince Edward Hastings Liberal candidate, Peter Tinsley. The buzz among supporters and staff was that they have a candidate of high quality, an honest and intelligent man who is willing to pitch in with the small tasks.

The local news for the morning was that the Green Party candidate of a number of campaigns, Alan Coxwell of Stirling, has withdrawn and put his support behind Peter Tinsley. After a public reading of Coxwell's letter of support, Tinsley spoke to volunteers.

According to Tinsley, the urgent need now is to make people aware how "critically important this election is." Peter's experience door to door says that people are not yet focused on the issues and the impending election. He indicated that the Liberal Party campaign will come out with its total platform tomorrow, Sunday. There are only 20 days left before the first poll.

Tinsley stated that though he has been politically aware his whole career, he has never engaged directly in the political process. He explained why he had become involved at this point. His conviction is that a "chill has set into the state of our democracy." Beyond the bread and butter issues of health care and the economy the "Reformers are seeking to change the very shape of our democracy." He finds it "ironic" that at this point, when peoples in the Middle East and North Africa are struggling for democracy, Canadians have to stand up for their birthright.

He thanked and encouraged the volunteers to become active immediately reaching out to friends and neighbours. He stated in conclusion that "there is an alternative and the Liberal Party will provide it."

BURNING THE KORAN

I am saddened and disgusted by the violence and deaths in Mazar-i-Sharif northern Afghanistan and further protests and deaths in southern Afghanistan. Likewise, I am saddened and disgusted by the actions of so-called "Christians" who have shown such disrespect for the Koran by burning it. Media have stirred up anger among Muslims in India and Pakistan. There is suspicion that what began as a peaceful protest in Mazar-i-Sharif was intentionally manipulated into a deadly event.  My heart goes out to those families that now grieve the death of family members.

Now following on the murder of those in the UN compound in Afghanistan there are calls from the same small Christian group for retribution. My memory is that Jesus' response to violence was not a call for retribution but a prayer for forgiveness -- Father forgive them for they know not what they do.

Here is a consideration: To understand the depth of the offense that burning the Koran occasions one must appreciate a difference between Islam and Christianity. For Christians Jesus is the Word of God; for Muslims the Koran as the heavenly book recited in pure Arabic speech is the Word of God. The centrality of Jesus in Christianity is paralleled by the central place given to the Koran in Islam. For the Muslim the Book is central.  A Christian understands Jesus as revealing the way God is to the point that Jesus the Christ is considered at the very heart of the holiness of God, the Word of God.

 The Koran affirms Jesus as a holy prophet and no Muslim would be tempted to show disrespect for Jesus or for the Bible without fear of offending against the Koran.

On our way to buy groceries this afternoon Cathy and I drove by the local "Muslim Association" and noticed that the parking lot was full. I recalled that Friday prayers are a regular practice in Islam. A google search concerning the Belleville Muslim Association turns up an exchange of e-mails concerning what kind of Islam is practiced there. The conclusion of the conversation has this as a Sunni site. The Muslim Sunni traveller along the 401 can conveniently turn in here Friday afternoons for Juma prayer -- obligatory for men and permitted for women.

May the prayers of all people today be for mutual forgiveness and peace!