text:
Tag Archives: Law

Love, and the Law: A Meditation

And because of the increase of lawlessness, the love of many will grow cold
(Matthew 24:12)

In my devotional reading this morning, this verse stood out for me, specifically, the relation between love and the law. Many contemporary Protestants think in terms of the incompatibility of love and law, that love and the Law are ‘antithetical.’

But this verse in Matthew suggests we revisit this relation. Matthew is very concerned that we consider the abiding validity of the ancient law: ‘until heaven and earth pass away’ not ‘the smallest stroke or letter shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished’ (Matthew 5:18).  And, of course, scholars continue to debate the meaning of what Jesus meant when he said he came not to abolish but to fulfil the law. Jesus, in Matthew 7:23, also excludes those ‘who practise lawlessness’ from his eschatological salvation (cf. 13:41).

It is clear that in his own life and teaching Jesus was dedicated to the law, although he also interpreted it idiosyncratically, in accordance with the Israelite prophetic tradition, and called his disciples to faithfulness with respect to this vision. He was concerned that they adhere to and practise the ‘weightier matters of the Law’ (Matthew 23:23), while not neglecting the other provisions. His teaching in Matthew 5:21-48 shows that he approaches the Law as instruction that points God’s people toward an understanding of God’s righteousness which is far more demanding than a mere adherence to its various stipulations. It is clear that Jesus also considered some aspects of the law as passé, at least as Mark understood his teaching (see Mark 7:14-23).

All this background should be considered when approaching this verse and its context in Matthew 24. In my meditation this morning it seemed to me that love and the Law are closely integrated with one another, and not at all set in opposition. This is not to say that the law is love, or even that the law can produce the desired love, although the Law certainly commanded God’s people to love their neighbour (Leviticus 19:18), and even the alien amongst them (v. 34). The law regulates human life and society, providing boundaries and restraint for the self. Remove these restraints—let lawlessness increase—and love grows cold, says Jesus. Lawlessness as an ethos, gives free reign to the self, and it is this that is antithetical to love, for love’s first concern is for the other.

Jesus’ words should challenge the kind of Christian antinomianism that finds no place at all for the Law. Frederick Dale Bruner agrees:

One of the best criteria for distinguishing false from true teachers will be the treatment of God’s law: false teachers will reject it, while true teachers will honor it, especially as it is interpreted messianically by Jesus (The Churchbook: Matthew 13-28, revised & expanded edition, 488).

Scripture on Sunday – James 2:14-26

James(I know it is late Monday, but I will keep the regular title of this post for continuity’s sake!)

Read James 2:14-26

Before I tackle this passage verse-by-verse, I want to stand back a little to get an overview of some the issues connected with this most central and most controversial of sections in James’ letter. The central message is unambiguous, being repeated three times: “faith without works is dead” (2:26; cf. vv. 17, 20). The issue is not so much understanding what James has said, as it is the apparent conflict between what James says here and what is said in other New Testament texts, especially Paul. A comparison of two key texts sets the issue in stark relief:

James 2:14, 21
What use is it, brothers and sisters, if someone says he has faith but he has not works? Can that faith save him? … Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?

Romans 3:28
For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

The centrality of the doctrine of justification by faith for Luther, and in Protestantism generally, caused Luther famously (or perhaps infamously) to relegate James to the least of the books in the New Testament:

Which are the true and noblest books of the New Testament? … In a word St. John’s Gospel and his first epistle, St. Paul’s epistles, especially Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, and St. Peter’s first epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that is necessary and salvatory for you to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore St. James’ epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of the gospel about it (Luther, “Preface to the New Testament” in Lull, T. F. (ed.), Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, 116-117).

Many Christians have for centuries followed Luther’s lead, subordinating James to Paul and as a result not hearing James’ distinctive message as clearly as they might. Some modern scholars have suggested that the New Testament documents represent different forms of Christianity; thus Paul’s writings express the faith and experience of a law-free Gentile church, while James expresses the faith and experience of a law-affirming Jewish Christianity (see Moo, 45, who cites as an example, Dunn, Unity and Diversity in the New Testament, 251-252). The question we face is whether there is a fundamental disjunction between the message of James and that of Paul, with respect to this central issue.

The major part of the problem revolves around the language and imagery used by James, including the key terms faith, works and justified, as well as his use of Abraham as an example of one who is justified on account of his works. Paul uses these same terms in his letters when discussing justification, and also uses Abraham as an example of one who is justified on account of his faith without any works. A careful examination of the passage, however, shows that James and Paul are approaching this topic from different directions and use the same terminology in different senses.

Thus, when Paul speaks of faith, he has in mind personal, whole-of-life commitment and allegiance to Jesus Christ. James, too, can speak of faith in this sense (cf. James 1:3, 6-8; 2:1, 5; 5:15). But in this passage, James is speaking of “faith” in an entirely different sense: he is speaking of one who claims to have faith, probably understood in the sense of right-belief, but whose life shows no evidence of genuine whole-of-life allegiance to Jesus. In this case, their life contradicts their profession. James mocks this kind of “faith” which is limited to doctrinal correctness: “the demons also believe!” (v. 19). For James, this kind of mental assent which does not penetrate to the heart and find expression in the concrete action of life, is no faith at all.

When Paul speaks of “the works of the Law” he usually has in mind the ceremonial works including such things as circumcision, Sabbaths and holy days, food laws, etc., although it is also true that he repudiates all and any kind of work whether ceremonial or moral as the basis of one’s justification by God (e.g. Ephesians 2:8-9). But, and this is important, Paul never diminished the abiding validity of the moral demand of the law. So in passages such as Galatians 5:6 (“For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love”) or 1 Corinthians 7:19 (“Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God”) we find a message very similar to that which James presents in this passage. Significantly, James appears entirely unconcerned about the issue of circumcision, perhaps because he was writing to Jewish Christians. More importantly, however, and despite the portrayal of James in Acts 21:18-26 and Galatians 2:12 as one who continued as a law-abiding Jew even as a Christian, in his letter James never appeals to or affirms any aspect of the ceremonial law, even while he assumes the continuing validity of the law itself. Even in this passage, James’ emphasis is on works of mercy toward the poor—continuing the theme of 2:1-13, the work of obedience to God in the case of Abraham, and faith itself as a work in the case of Rahab. The key for James is that genuine faith is active, issuing in obedience to God.

Finally, James and Paul are using the term “justified” (dikaioō) in different ways, something also illustrated in their different appeals to the example of Abraham. Paul speaks of justification as one’s initial transfer into right relationship with God on the basis of Christ’s atoning death, received through faith, just as Abraham also was justified by God on the basis of his faith prior to receiving the covenant sign of circumcision. James in this passage is speaking of one’s ultimate justification at the final judgement where the authenticity of one’s faith is demonstrated by the works and activity of one’s life (so Moo, 46-47; Seifrid, “Righteousness” in Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments, 624). Thus, although Abraham was initially accepted into right relationship with God, his faith was tested and proven—even by God—over the course of his life, and so demonstrated as genuine.

Scripture on Sunday – James 2:12

JamesJames 2:12
So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty.

In verses 12-13 James brings his discussion of partiality in the congregation to a climax. Because partiality is a violation of the love command, and because violation of the law in a single aspect renders one guilty of the whole law, his hearers are to “so speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty” (houtōs laleite kai houtōs poieite hōs dia nomou eleutherias mellontes krinesthai).

The double use of houtōs (“so”) serves to emphasise James’ point, as well as tie the exhortation to the clause which follows; that is, houtōshoutōshōs (so speak and so act as those…). Laleite and poieite are both present imperatives, and together cover the whole of the believer’s public life—their speech and their activity. All they say and all they do is to be said and done in light of the coming judgement.

The prominence and severity of judgement as a New Testament theme is often under-estimated by believers in the contemporary church, nurtured as we are on a vision of a gracious and merciful God. Yet the reality of divine judgement is central to the New Testament vision, being found in the teaching of Jesus, Paul, Peter, John, Hebrews, Jude and James, and providing the rationale for the proclamation of the gospel. In 4:12 James will affirm that “there is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the One who is able to save and to destroy.” In 5:9 he warns that “behold, the Judge is standing right at the door.” In verses 9-11 he implies the theme of judgement by referring to his hearers as “transgressors,” and speaking of those who are liable for the whole law. For James, this judgement is certain, and probably in his mind, imminent. His congregation, along with all believers, are certain to face the judgement (mellontes krinesthai).

This judgement will be in accordance with “the law of liberty” (dia nomou eleutherias). James has used this phrase already in 1:25, and its use again here suggests that the whole section on partiality be considered together with James’ discussion of true religion and active Christianity. In our discussion of the phrase in 1:25, we found that the “perfect law of liberty” refers to “the Old Testament ethic as explained and altered by Jesus… [i.e.] the teaching of Jesus” (Davids, 100). Important also is James’ reference to the “royal law” in 2:8, identifying the love command for one’s neighbour as the centre and sum of the whole law. So, too, in verse 13, he will summarise this law in the single term “mercy.” If the coming judgement is the lens through which we are to conduct our lives, the law—especially the love commandment, and its enactment through concrete practices of mercy toward the poor—is the measure by which our lives will be measured.

Scripture on Sunday – James 2:10-11

JamesJames 2:10-11
For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. For the one who said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’, also said, ‘You shall not murder.’ Now if you do not commit adultery but if you murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.

Here James defends his earlier assertion that those who practise partiality are “transgressors” (parabatai), which as we have seen, was a loaded and possibly offensive accusation for a Jewish audience. Whereas in verses 8-9 he uses direct address (“If you…” – second person plural), here he shifts to third person singular with the subjunctive to indicate a hypothetical situation: “For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point…” (Hostis gar holon ton nomon tērēsē ptaisē de en heni).

James assumes that his listeners in the messianic congregation are, like himself, Torah observant, aiming to “keep” the law as an expression of the divine will, to practise it, and to guard it from violation. His emphasis on the whole law was typical in Judaism and in at least some sectors of the early church. Jesus taught that “not an iota, not a dot” in the law can be overlooked, and even the “least of these commandments” must be kept (Matthew 5:18-19). So, too, Paul noted that the obligation of one who accepted the law was to the whole law (Galatians 5:3). Behind this sense of the unity of the law is the unity of the one lawgiver (James 4:12). The will of the one God is expressed in the one law, of which each command and instruction is a constituent part. Therefore to fail in one point—in this case, the command against partiality (Leviticus 19:15), itself a part of the love command which is the centre and sum of the law’s requirement—is to “become accountable for all of it” (gegonen pantōv enochos). Simply put, because the law is the singular expression of the will of God, to stumble or falter in one aspect of it, no matter how small or insignificant, is to become answerable or liable (enochos) to the whole law.

James extends his explanation with a specific illustration in verse eleven. “For the one who said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’, also said, ‘You shall not murder’” (Ho gar eipōn, Mē moicheusēs, eipen kai, Mē phoneusēs). The first point to note here is James’ conviction that God has spoken his commandments, specifically these commandments found in the so-called second table of the Decalogue. As such, the commandments are the expressed will of God. Second, although the commandments are in themselves distinct, they express the one will of the one God. Third, we note that James has here reversed the order of the sixth and seventh commandments, though this reversal is probably insignificant (cf. Paul in Romans 13:9; and Luke’s report in 18:20). More interesting is why James chose to illustrate his point with these particular commands. The on-going relevance of the Decalogue for the New Testament church, and especially the “second table” is undoubted, and as we have already noted, the commands against murder and adultery are specifically mentioned multiple times by different authors. In Jesus’ list of antitheses, these two commands occupy pride of place, although in their usual order (see Matthew 5:21-30). James will also allude to both commands again in chapter four, verses two and four:

You want something and do not have it; so you commit murder. … Adulterers! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God?

In this text, at least with respect to adultery, James uses it as an analogy for his hearers’ relation to God. Spiritually speaking, they are adulterers. Is James similarly accusing them metaphorically, of murder? Certainly there are disputes, quarrels and disunity among them, which Jesus insisted was a violation of the seventh commandment (Matthew 5:21-26). It may be that James is extending the analogy that Jesus has already drawn: just as anger and insults constitute a violation of righteousness indicated in the murder command, so any failure to love one’s neighbour is a similar violation.

“Now if you do not commit adultery but if you murder, you have become a transgressor of the law” (Ei de ou moicheueis phoneueis de, gegonas parabatēs nomou). Thus, the violation of the law at a single point—here the love command—makes one a transgressor. For James, obedience to the law is an all-or-nothing proposition, and his hearers’ partiality against the poor has rendered them guilty before God.

Two final points are needed here lest I leave a wrong impression. First, James is making a rhetorical point here in order to accuse his hearers and hopefully stimulate a change of their behaviour with respect to the poor. Thus, his reference to keeping the “whole law” must be understood in terms of the illustration he is giving, rather than as a theological point in which he insists that Christians must keep the whole Mosaic law, including the ceremonial detail and so on (see my comment on 1:25 and 2:8 where I explore James’ understanding of the ongoing relevance of the law in the life of the messianic congregation). Second, James is not commending a heroic spirituality of moral perfectionism. He knows as well as any that such perfection is impossible. While he insists on ethical rigor with respect to our relation to God’s will, he is also aware that it is only by grace that we stand in the presence of God (4:6-10), and that we remain ever in need of God’s forgiveness which thankfully, is also freely offered (5:16-20).

Scripture on Sunday – James 2:9

JamesJames 2:9
But if you show partiality, you commit sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors.

This verse is a second conditional clause answering the first conditional clause given in verse eight. There, James has said that “if you love your neighbour, according to the Scripture, you do well.” Here, he poses the contrary condition, pressing home the point he has been making since verse one: “But if you show partiality, you commit sin…” (Ei de prosōpolēmpteite, hamartian ergazesthe).

The Greek term translated “acts of favouritism” in verse one is the same as that translated “partiality” here, thus uniting the whole section. Just as favouritism is incompatible with faith in Jesus Christ, so it is also incompatible with the royal law of love which is the centre and sum of the whole law, and the most complete expression of the divine will. Whereas the one who loves their neighbour “does well,” the one who shows partiality is “committing sin.” It is worth noting that the verbs in the second conditional statement, like those in the first, are also in the present tense and so also imply enduring action. So Vlachos suggests that prosōpolēmpteite depicts a pattern of prejudicial behaviour (79). James names this bluntly for what it is: sin, a form of behaviour contrary to and in violation of God’s will as it is revealed in the Scripture.

Many commentators note that James need not journey far from the Levitical love command to find a specific prohibition against partiality; the two commands occur in the same passage:

You shall not render an unjust judgement; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great: with justice you shall judge your neighbour (Leviticus 19:15).

To love one’s neighbour includes treating them with justice, and specifically, without partiality. To the degree that James’ hearers practice favouritism, they set themselves at variance with God’s expressed command: they “commit” sin. We have previously met ergazesthe in our discussions of 1:3 and 1:20, where it carries the sense of produces. The person is working and productive, but these are not the good works James will go on to commend, but an evil work springing from an evil heart (v. 4).

Not only is the partial person committing sin, they are also “convicted by the law as transgressors” (elegkomenoi hypo tou nomou hōs parabatai). The same law which is expressive of the divine will now acts as judge against those who violate its commandments. James again presses his primary point: in showing partiality, you are convicted; you have become transgressors of the law. Parabatai denotes a direct violation of a known command (Vlachos, 79), and as such constituted serious rebellion for the Jew and the Jewish Christian. Such a person was throwing off the divine yoke, and placing themselves instead under divine judgment (Davids, 116). McKnight (210) concludes, then, that acts of partiality in the congregation have a twofold effect, first releasing the destructive power and agency of sin to work in the midst of the congregation (cf. 1:14-15), and second, conferring the status of transgressors upon those who act in this way.

Scripture on Sunday – James 2:8

JamesJames 2:8
You do well if you really fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself.’ (NRSV)

If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself,’ you are doing well. (NASB)

To recap: in verse one James provides the imperative which governs the first half of the chapter: no partiality! Partiality in the Christian congregation is incompatible with faith in Jesus Christ because (a) God has chosen the poor of this world (v.5); (b) the rich who some in the church are favouring are also those oppressing the church and blaspheming the name of Jesus (vv. 6-7); (c) partiality issues from an evil intent and divides the church (v.4). That verses 8-13 continue this theme is evident especially in verse nine where James again directly refers to partiality and labels it as sin. These verses provide additional theological reasons to support his initial imperative.

The two translations of verse 8 are both possible. Ei mentoi (“if, however,” or “if you really”) sets up a conditional statement which is then contrasted with a second similar condition in verse nine. Mentoi appears seven times in the New Testament and in each of the other six, it is translated “however.” If understood in this way, James is probably drawing a contrast with the accusation of verse six, “But you have dishonoured the poor man…” and so exhorting them to a better path. Many translations and commentators, however, prefer the second possibility which sets up the contrast with verse nine in a more thoroughgoing way: “If you really fulfil … but if you show partiality…” Both translations are acceptable and nothing of significance hangs on either one.

The point in question concerns if they “are (really) fulfilling the royal law” (ei mentoi nomon teleite basilikov). Teleite, second person present plural of teleō, means to “accomplish” or “to observe fully.” The verb appears in the present tense suggesting continuous or enduring action, and so calls James’ hearers to observe habitually and completely the law in its entirety. James further identifies this law as royal (basilikon), thus designating it the “king’s” law, or perhaps better in view of his reference in verse five to the kingdom (basileia), the “law of the kingdom.”

It is tempting to apply this phrase “royal law” to the single command James now highlights: “according to the Scripture, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself’” (kata tēn graphēn, Agapēseis ton plēsion sou hōs seauton). Understood as such, it may suggest that this is the only command that one need be concerned with. In verses 10-11, however, James goes on to insist that his hearers are accountable for the whole law, thus showing a more complex relation to the law. Some commentators, such as Vlachos (78), suggest that the law here refers to the Mosaic law as a whole. Moo (94) suggests that the royal law refers to the entire will of God for Christians, especially as that will is revealed in the teaching of Jesus. Nevertheless, “James is concerned to show that the ‘law of the kingdom’ does not replace, but takes up within it the demand of God in the Old Testament.” Davids (114) notes that James’ use of nomos rather than entolē (“command”) decisively shows that he intends the whole law. He asks nevertheless, “is it not most natural to see a reference to the whole law as interpreted and handed over to the church in the teaching of Jesus, i.e. the sovereign rule of God’s kingdom?”

The command James cites derives from Leviticus 19:18 (cf. v. 34). Although the verb “love” is in the future tense, it functions imperativally as a command. In their original context in Leviticus, the words “love” and “neighbour” are as broad in meaning as they are in contemporary English, and so resist being limited to a narrow range of activities or persons (Wenham, The Book of Leviticus [NICOT], 269). In the New Testament, the command is identified by Jesus as the second most significant command of the law, after the command to love God with all one’s heart, soul and strength (Mark 12:28-31; cf. Deuteronomy 6:4-6). Jesus’ linking of these two commands was unique in Judaism, and McKnight (208) notes that James, too, links the ideas in this text (2:5, 8). Jesus’ identification of the central significance of this particular command was also shared by Paul who viewed the Leviticus command as a summary and fulfilment of the whole law (Romans 13:9-10; cf. Galatians 5:14).

It appears, then, that James also stands in this broad sweep of New Testament ethics in which love of neighbour came to be seen as the centre and goal of the law. James now resolves the condition with which he began the verse: If you really love your neighbour, you are doing well. “You are doing well” (kalōs poieite), also in the present tense, also has enduring force. This little phrase again suggests that the keeping of the love command fulfils what God requires of his people in terms of ethics. As McKnight (209) says, this becomes “a noble, excellent and proper rule of life for the messianic community.”

This text, therefore, stands alongside a host of other New Testament passages in which love is the sum and substance of the Christian life. This does not mean, however, that the law has no place in the Christian life. James was Torah-observant, as McKnight (207) insists, and, as we shall see, he intended the messianic community to live in accordance with the law. Still, if Davids is correct as I suspect he is, it is the law as interpreted by Jesus and passed onto the church. Thus we see in James a hermeneutic at work, a hermeneutic in all likelihood learnt from Jesus, in which the Old Testament law still plays a role in the life of the Christian community, albeit as mediated in and through the authoritative tradition of Jesus’ life and teaching.

Scripture on Sundays – James 1:25

Saint_James_the_JustJames 1:25
But those who look into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and persevere, being not hearers who forget but doers who act—they will be blessed in their doing.

Finally, the point of James’ little parable becomes clear. James has exhorted his listeners to be doers of the Word and not hearers only, for the one who is only a hearer and not a doer is like a person who upon looking at their image in a mirror, goes away and immediately forgets what they look like. Literally, they forget what kind of person they are (vv. 22-24). “But those who look into the perfect law, the law of liberty,” says James, “and persevere, being not hearers who forget but doers who act—they will be blessed in their doing.” The point of the parable revolves around the contrast between hearers who forget and doers who act. It is this particular contrast which draws together the language of the previous verses and so unites the whole passage.

Another contrast has been suggested. Some commentators, for example, contrast the “momentary glance” into the mirror with the sustained and persevering study of the Scriptures. The language James uses, however, does not allow this. In verse 23, the word used for looking into the mirror is katanoounti which means to “take note of, consider, to study,” or as Moo notes, the word regularly connotes thoughtful, attentive consideration. So, too, the word used in this verse, parakyptō, literally has the sense of “to bend over to look at more closely, to peer” (Zerwick-Grosvenor, 693; Moo, 83). Thus the contrast between the two persons is not in the manner of the looking, but in the doing as opposed to the forgetting. The person who merely hears the Word gains no more lasting benefit from the Word than they do from looking at themselves in the mirror (Moo). The person who perseveres in the Word and is a doer, however, is blessed in their doing.

The details of this verse are worth pondering. James shifts his language in this verse from that which he used earlier. In verses 18, 21, 22 and 23 he refers to the “Word,” whereas in verse 25 this Word has become “the perfect law, the law of liberty” (nomon teleion tov tēs eleutherias). Further, instead of “doers of the Word” as in vv. 22-23, the person is now a “doer who acts,” or literally, “a doer of the work” (poiētēs ergou).

What does James mean by his first shift? The first thing to note is that for the Jew, the law signified God’s revealed and authoritative will. That the Jews considered the law to be good and perfect is clearly seen in such passages as Psalms 19:7-10 and Romans 7:12. That James saw some continuing validity in the law is seen in 2:8-12 and 4:11-12. In James 2:8-12 James again refers to the “law of liberty” (v. 12) as well as referring to “the royal law” when citing Leviticus 18:19. Further, in this text, the law as a principle and not simply as a rule, is still valid. If a person keeps the whole law, but fails in one point, they become accountable for the whole. In 4:11-12 James refers to God as the lawgiver and judge, thus emphasising the divine authority which lies behind the law.

Is James therefore teaching in verse 25 that the believer must diligently persevere in the Old Testament law in order to be blessed? The matter is not quite that simple. Although James certainly sees the continuing validity of some aspects of the law (see, e.g. 2:8, 11), it is likely that he is reading the law not simply as a Jew, but as a Messianic Jew, that is, as a follower of Jesus in whom the law has been fulfilled (Moo, 50). This is seen most obviously in the flow of James’ argument to this point. The “Word” which James has been referring to throughout this section is the word of truth (v. 18), that is, the gospel. When he substitutes the phrase “the perfect law of liberty” James does not simply jettison the gospel and substitute the Mosaic law as the basis of Christian life and blessing, but reads the law “in a Jesus kind of way” (McKnight, 158), or as Davids expresses the same idea, the “perfect law of liberty” refers to “the Old Testament ethic as explained and altered by Jesus… [i.e.] the teaching of Jesus” (100). James, together with other early Christians—including Paul—viewed the law as fulfilled and perfected in Jesus, and so Jesus as the giver of a new or renewed law (Davids, 99). This, perhaps, is the point of Matthew’s portrayal of Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, especially in Matthew 5:17-48. Paul, too, can refer to “the Law of Christ” in Galatians 6:2 and 1 Corinthians 9:21, where it likely has reference to the love commandment which fulfils the law (Romans 13:8-10), and is thus the equivalent of James’ “royal law” (2:8), and an echo of Jesus’ second great commandment (Mark 12:31). James’ point is simple: the good news of the gospel includes an unavoidable and searching demand for obedience (Moo, 84). Put theologically, the gospel does not supersede the law but includes the law, though the law fulfilled and radically reinterpreted and refocused by Jesus.

James’ second shift is from “doers of the Word” to “doers of the work.” While it is probably better to translate poiētēs ergou as a “doer who acts” in order to maintain the contrast with the “hearer who forgets,” we do well to pause over James’ use of ergon here, given that “work” and “works” constitute a major theme in his letter, and his use here presages the major treatment of the theme which he will undertake in 2:14-26. Further, in verses 26-27 James will bring this section to its climax by identifying three particular kinds of “work” or activity he intends his listeners to engage in, including especially the work of controlling the tongue, as well as works of mercy and holiness.

James, then, understands the law of liberty in terms of obedience to Jesus’ teaching as he reinterprets the law, and so as a word which makes free (cf. John 8:31-32). The believer is to “persevere” (kai parameinas) in this liberating Word as a doer who acts and thus as a doer of the work. Although Zerwick-Grosvenor (693) suggest that the perseverance is in the activity of looking into the perfect law of liberty, it is better to understand it in the sense of practicing what one finds there, as James goes on to say. In this way one becomes a “doer who acts” rather than a “hearer who forgets” (ouk akroatēs epilēsmonēs alla poiētēs ergou), and so one who also “will be blessed in their doing” (houtos makarios en tē poiēsei autou estai). Estai is future and so suggests that the blessing will be eschatological (cf. v. 12). Nevertheless, the “doer” will be blessed “in the doing” suggesting that a blessing will also accompany the actual act, and so the blessing may have a temporal as well as an eschatological aspect.


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: text/html

WARC-Type: response

text:
The Economy

Confused about the economy? You are not alone! I am often left somewhat confused after reading an article by an economist and the comments that follow. Technical jargon leaves me scratching my head. Economist often attempt to explain why inflation is low or high, why productivity is down, how does the GDP relate to the common man, or why have or haven’t workers wages risen. Certainly, these economists have advanced knowledge of the topics and believe in the reasons they put forth, but one thing seems to be missing from the articles, humanity.

financial stressThe person working 2-3 jobs just to make ends meet and only has a few hundred dollars in the bank does not need to read an article to know that wages are not rising fast enough or that there are not enough opportunities for advancement. I know economists are not policymakers, but wouldn’t it be great if they could work together to help our government leaders craft policies that would improve the lives of all citizens?

Wealth of Walmart Heirs and Hourly Wage of employees

This post on our social media feeds generated huge interest and many comments. Over 300 comments were made and the post was shared 622 times on Facebook.

Several people commented that Walmart employees should just get another job if the pay wasn’t enough. Others pointed out that in their opinion these entry-level jobs should not pay more as they require little skill or education. There have been a number of studies showing that the economy has been adding more jobs in low paying, service sector jobs such as retail or restaurant work and that opportunities for advancement are not as plentiful as they once were. Read more about these dead-end jobs in this story – “For millions, low-wage work really is a dead end”

There are many people at the corporate level who have had successful careers at Walmart. Some retail workers have worked their way up to management positions, but far too many are stuck in low paying, retail positions. As with any company, there are good and bad points to Walmart. When we see annual profits in the billions, we wonder why the company isn’t doing more to raise wages for its lowest paid employees. Working in retail often means unpredictable scheduling and less than full-time hours. These front line employees can make or break the shopping experience for customers and are critical to the company’s success. It is long past time to raise their wages. Even when all signs point up for the economy, millions of people in low paying jobs are still struggling to make ends meet.

Hair Stylists – The Original Gig Economy Workers

In a recent conversation with a hair stylist, I learned that many of them simply rent a chair in a salon and are considered self-employed. There are no benefits such as paid time off for vacation or sick days and no health insurance. A missed day means no pay. The hair stylist I spoke with was expecting a baby and explained how she had worked hard to save up enough money to allow her to have 6 weeks off with her new child. This is not unusual as many jobs do not offer paid maternity leave. We are the only developed nation without a national maternity leave policy.

Hair Stylist at workLong before Uber and Lyft brought the issue to our attention by requiring drivers to cover all their costs and be classified as independent contractors, hair stylists were suffering from the same lack of employer support. The website Think Progress posted this informative article about the hair salon industry – Why Your Beauty Salon Likely Doesn’t Have Any Employees.

There were more than 670,000 people working as barbers, hairstylists, or cosmetologists in 2016. The Bureau of Labor Statistics expects job growth to be 13% in the next 10 years, adding more than 87,000 jobs. These hard-working people often spend 8 or more hours on their feet each shift and earn a median wage of $12 an hour. Ask your hair stylist or barber about their job, it is the only way we can begin to understand the struggles of our fellow citizens.

One Union BannerThe One Union

A Mega-People Corporation

Here at The One Union, we are working hard to provide a platform for unity and change. We recognize that wages are not going up fast enough for many of the lowest paid employees and that the vast inequality in our country is unacceptable. If you are tired of the hate and division and are ready for a change, join us in our mission to make this country a better place for all citizens.

Join The One Union

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notice: Undefined index: viewedExitPopupWP in /var/app/current/UA-Wordpress/wp-content/plugins/exit-popup/exit-popup.php on line 157

warcinfo:
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-18
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for April 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-169-175-90.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/


text:
What the Gaming!? Gas Prices

What the Gaming!? : Gas prices

So I walked down the street last night and noticed the ridiculous price of gas and decided to take a picture ignore my gun as you can see in the background I live in a very rough neighborhood so I never leave my house without my gun… at this point I’m guessing you’re not buying my story. Okay so what actually happened was I was playing Call of Duty Ghosts and I have a habit of always checking the gas prices in games especially old games so I can be like “Ah the good old days” but I saw this and it made me laugh and die a little inside at the same time because I see this as a possibility in the future…However I do want all my loyal readers to try and check the price of gas in the games you play just to see what it says who knows you may even find an Easter egg like literally charging an arm and a leg. Such as this one.

We all here at ONS Gaming want to thank you for visiting our site we hope you will return often!
Don’t hesitate to leave comments, suggestions or requests or even questions … down below or at our social medias!
Also don’t forget to follow us and help us via likes and shares on any of our mediums to show support you all make it possible!

ONS Gaming Youtube Channel
Twitter: @TheONSGaming

Don’t forget you can always message us here anonymously or email us @ or at our individual ONSGaming emails!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


text:
Posted in adoptee, adoption, Blogging, family is everything, my thoughts, personal, World adoption day

Who I Am: Being Adopted

I’m not asking “who am I?” Because I think I know myself well enough now to tell you who I am.

I don’t think we ever know ourselves completely, but as the kind of person who tends to think a lot, I think I can explain myself at least a little.
Where to start, though?
I was born in Hong Kong thirty years ago.  My mother was practically a school girl, seventeen and still at home with her parents. Being born out of wedlock it was admirable that my birth mother and my pawpaw tried to raise me even still.
It was actually because I became seriously ill that they had to give me up.
I was placed in an orphanage, the Po Leung Kuk, and due to circumstances out of their control I was there for three years.  I like to believe that it was all part of God’s plan and timing.
To explain my view further, my parents, Alison and Bruce, applied for adoption and the day I was born was the day they were approved.  Bear in mind, they didn’t know I existed at that time.  They didn’t find out about me until I was 2 1/2ish.
That’s definitely God’s doing.
Anyway to cut a long story short, mum and dad picked me up on my third birthday and took me home to Melbourne, where I lived for seven years.

I had some great experiences while living there. Made lasting friendships through primary school and church.

I went to Presbyterian Ladies College from Prep to Grade five. I have vague and vivid memories from my time at the school. Some good, some embarrassing.

I remember getting into trouble for poking my tongue out at my then best friend Michelle and having to sit outside the office. I remember sitting on the stands during swimming when I was not well enough to swim talking to a friend who also wasn’t swimming. I remember playing “first is worst, second is best” when lining up to get back into class. I remember Mr Law (my year 3 teacher who was captain of North Melbourne kangaroos in the early 90s).  I remember playing with my toy horses and using the partition in my lunch box as a fence.

I remember the bully two years ahead of us, Hangman. I remember playing Mother May I on the steps. Remember going to the wrong class and being totally embarrassed. This could be where my anxiety in speaking out could’ve stemmed from.

I remember having flute lessons and having to walk over to the senior school. I remember the under croft. I remember…

It’s amazing what one can remember, though I don’t know if these are true memories or ones that I was told about by other people.

From church – my home church then was Donvale Presbyterian Church – I remember the old hall. I can picture it in my head, but I can’t really describe it. I remember people’s faces but I can’t remember names. Well, not all of them. I can’t picture the old church building, though as it looks very different now. It’s over fifty years old, the church.

And then there was my horse riding, and jazz ballet and tap that I did for a year. The latter, not the former.

So many memories of Melbourne; of my childhood.  They were important years in forming who I am today.  Though I’ve lived in both Townsville and Perth longer than I lived there.

We also adopted my younger brother in this time
And I met my birth mother.

We moved to Townsville in 1996, and I feel I remember more of the time we lived there than in Melbourne.  I formed few lasting friendships (Sarah came to my wedding this year) and for the first few years we were part of a group of families who were all adoptees/adoptive.
It was great to be able to be part of a group of people who had shared stories. I wonder what happened to those families?
In this period, we went back to Hong Kong to meet my birth mother again and also to meet my brother’s birth mother.
On a related tangent, I think it’s absolutely amazing that my parents were able to connect me with my birth mother.  My adoption was a closed one, which meant that it wasn’t actually supposed to be allowed for me to search for her.  But, mum and dad believed it to be important and I am grateful that they did.  I personally don’t remember how I felt the first time, but even now it’s still kind of surreal when I think of her, as I consider my parents to be my parents.  As it should be.
Another note, I probably faced racism in school, but it wasn’t something that ever fazed me any, it was all kind of just a part of the ingrained culture of high school and wasn’t any more bad or worse than any other form of teasing.
Even as an adult I don’t really get any negative racism from anyone.  And I think the fact that I was brought up to tolerate and accept people who are different from me helps in this.  Also my upbringing in the Church.
I know I haven’t mentioned much about that, but, I’m talking on more of a broad view of my life as an adoptee.  However, in essence, God is at the centre of all of it.  So, there really isn’t any need to delve into my faith right now.
I must mention briefly that when I was in high school and doing my first degree while living in Townsville, we went to a Presbyterian Church that I eventually started to only go to once a month or so, because it just wasn’t drawing me.  I never moved away from God, even when studying a science degree, but I just became jaded about the church itself.
Fast forward to when we moved to Perth, and I found my second home, Riverview.  But, that’s a whole other blog post.  Suffice to say that my 9 years in this city has helped me grow even more in myself, and forever reminds me of how grateful I am for the opportunities I’ve been afforded because I was adopted, and the people I’ve met.  Including my wonderful husband, who is also adopted (along with his sister and her husband).
Adoption is special.  Adoption is about creating family.  Adoption is all about love.
God bless you all.
**Apologies for the disjointedness of some of this blog.  I don’t think in perfectly, grammatically correct English.


text:
Migraine and forms of currency…

Had REALLY crappy sleep last night after some REALLY good sex.  Thanks bRaving Bipolar!  Because of the really crappy sleep, and my rock hard pillow, I’ve had a migraine all day and feel as if I’m sick.  Despite that, our family went out to a local mall and the kids played at the kid’s area while we watched.  After that we had lunch in the food court, came home, I took our oldest two to get a new pillow for me.  I’m a side sleeper, so I need a firm pillow, but it needs to have some cushion.  After returning home, had an interesting discussion with my wife.

She feels that sometimes when I say she can do things, like get her nails done or go out by herself to eat, and ask her for sex later, that I’m asking for “payment” for those things.  In reality, she’s partially right.  I never attach sex to anything that involves her leaving the house; for example when I can see that she’s stressed I will send her out for lunch/dinner/whatever.  The things I do attach sex to are things that I do around the house.  I don’t do them with sex as an expectation.  I do it with a hope that she will notice I’ve put significant effort into something that will make her happy, and hope she’ll reward me with sex.

Some of my issues with sex have gone away; not really an impulse anymore.  It doesn’t consume my thoughts and makes me wonder if it was ever an “addiction”, and instead it was just an extremely high sex drive and coping mechanism.  Either way, it doesn’t cause impairment in my day anymore, and hasn’t for a month or two.

Back to doing things for sex, she can testify that going the extra mile generally isn’t enough for me; the standard I set for myself is to go 10 extra miles.  If I told her when I was doing something hoping she would have sex with me, and when I wanted to go above and beyond just because I wanted to make her happy and by proxy, me, she would probably easily see a pattern.  Even the times I do go the extra distance for sex, it is just a secondary motivation; the things I did still needed to be done, I just do A LOT of them at one time, to a high degree, and organized it in a way that she can continue the next day if she chooses.

I told her I wouldn’t use chores as a currency for sex anymore, I don’t want it to be like that.  We have some marital therapy tomorrow, followed by a date to Buffalo Wild Wings.  New marriage therapist, so we’ll see how that goes.

I miss my war.

Written by a Soldier, but still pretty accurate.  If I’m guilty of having an affair right now, it’s with my love of what I used to do.  No matter how much I love my wife, my kids, my life with them, I will always wish I could go back there and wage my war.  I don’t love war more, I wouldn’t go back to it at the risk of losing my wife and kids; that doesn’t mean I can’t miss it.

I Miss Iraq. I Miss My Gun. I Miss My War.

A year after coming home from a tour in Iraq, a soldier returns home to find out he left something behind.

Photograph by Brian Mockenhaupt

A few months ago, I found a Web site loaded with pictures and videos from Iraq, the sort that usually aren’t seen on the news. I watched insurgent snipers shoot American soldiers and car bombs disintegrate markets, accompanied by tinny music and loud, rhythmic chanting, the soundtrack of the propaganda campaigns. Video cameras focused on empty stretches of road, building anticipation. Humvees rolled into view and the explosions brought mushroom clouds of dirt and smoke and chunks of metal spinning through the air. Other videos and pictures showed insurgents shot dead while planting roadside bombs or killed in firefights and the remains of suicide bombers, people how they’re not meant to be seen, no longer whole. The images sickened me, but their familiarity pulled me in, giving comfort, and I couldn’t stop. I clicked through more frames, hungry for it. This must be what a shot of dope feels like after a long stretch of sobriety. Soothing and nauseating and colored by everything that has come before. My body tingled and my stomach ached, hollow. I stood on weak legs and walked into the kitchen to make dinner. I sliced half an onion before putting the knife down and watching slight tremors run through my hand. The shakiness lingered. I drank a beer. And as I leaned against this kitchen counter, in this house, in America, my life felt very foreign.

I’ve been home from Iraq for more than a year, long enough for my time there to become a memory best forgotten for those who worried every day that I was gone. I could see their relief when I returned. Life could continue, with futures not so uncertain. But in quiet moments, their relief brought me guilt. Maybe they assume I was as overjoyed to be home as they were to have me home. Maybe they assume if I could do it over, I never would have gone. And maybe I wouldn’t have. But I miss Iraq. I miss the war. I miss war. And I have a very hard time understanding why.

I’m glad to be home, to have put away my uniforms, to wake up next to my wife each morning. I worry about my friends who are in Iraq now, and I wish they weren’t. Often I hated being there, when the frustrations and lack of control over my life were complete and mind-bending. I questioned my role in the occupation and whether good could come of it. I wondered if it was worth dying or killing for. The suffering and ugliness I saw disgusted me. But war twists and shifts the landmarks by which we navigate our lives, casting light on darkened areas that for many people remain forever unexplored. And once those darkened spaces are lit, they become part of us. At a party several years ago, long before the Army, I listened to a friend who had served several years in the Marines tell a woman that if she carried a pistol for a day, just tucked in her waistband and out of sight, she would feel different. She would see the world differently, for better or worse. Guns empower. She disagreed and he shrugged. No use arguing the point; he was just offering a little piece of truth. He was right, of course. And that’s just the beginning.

I’ve spent hours taking in the world through a rifle scope, watching life unfold. Women hanging laundry on a rooftop. Men haggling over a hindquarter of lamb in the market. Children walking to school. I’ve watched this and hoped that someday I would see that my presence had made their lives better, a redemption of sorts. But I also peered through the scope waiting for someone to do something wrong, so I could shoot him. When you pick up a weapon with the intent of killing, you step onto a very strange and serious playing field. Every morning someone wakes wanting to kill you. When you walk down the street, they are waiting, and you want to kill them, too. That’s not bloodthirsty; that’s just the trade you’ve learned. And as an American soldier, you have a very impressive toolbox. You can fire your rifle or lob a grenade, and if that’s not enough, call in the tanks, or helicopters, or jets. The insurgents have their skill sets, too, turning mornings at the market into chaos, crowds into scattered flesh, Humvees into charred scrap. You’re all part of the terrible magic show, both powerful and helpless.

That men are drawn to war is no surprise. How old are boys before they turn a finger and thumb into a pistol? Long before they love girls, they love war, at least everything they imagine war to be: guns and explosions and manliness and courage. When my neighbors and I played war as kids, there was no fear or sorrow or cowardice. Death was temporary, usually as fast as you could count to sixty and jump back into the game. We didn’t know yet about the darkness. And young men are just slightly older versions of those boys, still loving the unknown, perhaps pumped up on dreams of duty and heroism and the intoxicating power of weapons. In time, war dispels many such notions, and more than a few men find that being freed from society’s professed revulsion to killing is really no freedom at all, but a lonely burden. Yet even at its lowest points, war is like nothing else. Our culture craves experience, and that is war’s strong suit. War peels back the skin, and you live with a layer of nerves exposed, overdosing on your surroundings, when everything seems all wrong and just right, in a way that makes perfect sense. And then you almost die but don’t, and are born again, stoned on life and mocking death. The explosions and gunfire fry your nerves, but you want to hear them all the same. Something’s going down.

For those who know, this is the open secret: War is exciting. Sometimes I was in awe of this, and sometimes I felt low and mean for loving it, but I loved it still. Even in its quiet moments, war is brighter, louder, brasher, more fun, more tragic, more wasteful. More. More of everything. And even then I knew I would someday miss it, this life so strange. Today the war has distilled to moments and feelings, and somewhere in these memories is the reason for the wistfulness.

On one mission we slip away from our trucks and into the night. I lead the patrol through the darkness, along canals and fields and into the town, down narrow, hard-packed dirt streets. Everyone has gone to bed, or is at least inside. We peer through gates and over walls into courtyards and into homes. In a few rooms TVs flicker. A woman washes dishes in a tub. Dogs bark several streets away. No one knows we are in the street, creeping. We stop at intersections, peek around corners, training guns on parked cars, balconies, and storefronts. All empty. We move on. From a small shop up ahead, we hear men’s voices and laughter. Maybe they used to sit outside at night, but now they are indoors, where it’s safe. Safer. The sheet-metal door opens and a man steps out, cigarette and lighter in hand. He still wears a smile, takes in the cool night air, and then nearly falls backward through the doorway in a panic. I’m a few feet from him now and his eyes are wide. I mutter a greeting and we walk on, back into the darkness.

Another night we’re lost in a dust storm. I’m in the passenger seat, trying to guide my driver and the three trucks behind us through this brown maelstrom. The headlights show nothing but swirling dirt. We’ve driven these roads for months, we know them well, but we see nothing. So we drive slow, trying to stay out of canals and people’s kitchens. We curse and we laugh. This is bizarre but a great deal of fun.

Another night my platoon sergeant’s truck is swallowed in flames, a terrible, beautiful, boiling bloom of red and orange and yellow, lighting the darkness for a moment. Somehow we don’t die, one more time.

Another night, there’s McCarthy bitching, the cherry of his cigarette bobbing in the dark, bitching that he won’t be on the assault team, that he’s stuck as a turret gunner for the night. We’d been out since early that morning, came back for dinner, and are preparing to raid a weapons dealer. Our first real raid. I heave my body armor onto my shoulders, settling its too-familiar weight. Then the helmet and first-aid kit and maps and radio and ammunition and rifle and all the rest. Now I look like everyone else, an arm of this strange and destructive organism, covered in armor and guns. We crowd around a satellite map spread across a Humvee hood and trace our route. Wells, my squad leader, rehearses our movements. Get in quick. Watch the danger zones. If he has a gun, kill him. I look around the group, at these faces I know so well, and feel the collective strength, this ridiculous power. The camaraderie of men in arms plays a part, for sure. The shared misery and euphoria and threat of death. But there is something more: the surrender of self, voluntary or not, to the machine. Do I believe in the war? Not important. Put that away and live in the moment, where little is knowable and even less is controllable, when my world narrows to one street, one house, one room, one door.

We pack into the trucks after midnight, and the convoy snakes out of camp and speeds toward the target house. I sit in a backseat and the fear settles in, a sharp burning in my stomach, same as the knot from hard liquor gulped too fast. I think about the knot. I’ll be the first through the door. What if he starts shooting, hits me right in the face before I’m even through the doorway? What if there’s two, or three? What if he pitches a grenade at us? And I think about it more and run through the scenarios, planning my movements, imagining myself clearing through the rooms, firing two rounds into the chest, and the knot fades.

The trucks drop us off several blocks from the target house and we slip into the night. As always, the dogs bark. We gather against the high wall outside the house and call in the trucks to block the streets. The action will pass in a flash. But here, before the chaos starts, when we’re stacked against the wall, my friends’ bodies pressed against me, hearing their quick breaths and my own, there’s a moment to appreciate the gravity, the absurdity, the novelty, the joy of the moment. Is this real? Hearts beat strong. Hands grip tight on weapons. Reassurance. The rest of the world falls away. Who knows what’s on the other side?

One, two, three, go. We push past the gate and across the courtyard and toward the house, barrels locked on the windows and roof. Wells runs up with the battering ram, a short, heavy pipe with handles, and launches it toward the massive wood door. The lock explodes, the splintered door flies open, and we rush through, just the way we’ve practiced hundreds of times. No one shoots me in the face. No grenades roll to my feet. I kick open doors. We scan darkened bedrooms with the flashlights on our rifles and move on to the next and the next.

He’s gone, of course. We ransack his house, dumping drawers, flipping mattresses, punching holes in the ceiling. We find rifles and grenades and hundreds of pounds of gunpowder. And then, near dawn, we lie down on the thick carpets in his living room and sleep, exhausted and untroubled.

Many, many raids followed. We often raided houses late at night, so people awakened to soldiers bursting through their bedroom doors. Women and children wailed, terrified. Taking this in, I imagined what it would feel like if soldiers kicked down my door at midnight, if I could do nothing to protect my family. I would hate those soldiers. Yet I still reveled in the raids, their intensity and uncertainty. The emotions collided, without resolution.

My wife moved to Iraq partway through my second deployment to live in the north and train Iraqi journalists. She spent her evenings at restaurants and tea shops with her Iraqi friends. We spoke by cell phone, when the spotty network allowed, and she told me about this life I couldn’t imagine, celebrating holidays with her colleagues and being invited into their homes. I didn’t have any Iraqi friends, save for our few translators, and I’d rarely been invited into anyone’s home. I told her of my life, the tedious days and frightful seconds, and she worried that in all of this I would lose my thoughtfulness and might stop questioning and just accept. But she didn’t judge the work that I did, and I didn’t tell her that I sometimes enjoyed it, that for stretches of time I didn’t think about the greater implications, that it sometimes seemed like a game. I didn’t tell her that death felt ever present and far away, and that either way, it didn’t really seem to matter.

We both came back from Iraq, luckier than many. Two of my wife’s students have been killed, among the scores of journalists to die in Iraq, and guys I served with are still dying, too. One came home from the war and shot himself on Thanksgiving. Another was blown up on Christmas in Baghdad.

Thinking of them, I felt disgusted with myself for missing the war and wondered if I was alone in this.

I don’t think I am.

After watching the Internet videos, I called some of my friends who are out of the Army now, and they miss the war, too. Wells very nearly died in Iraq. A sniper shot him in the head, surgeons cut out half of his skulla story told in this magazine last Apriland he spent months in therapy, working back to his old self. Now he misses the high. “I don’t want to sound like a psychopath, but you’re like a god over there,” he says. “It might not be the best kind of adrenaline for you, but it’s a rush.” Before Iraq, he didn’t care for horror movies, and now he’s drawn to them. He watches them for the little thrill, the rush of being startled, if just for a moment.

McCarthy misses the war just the same. He saved Wells’s life, pressing a bandage over the hole in his head. Now he’s delivering construction materials to big hotel projects along the beach in South Carolina, waiting for a police department to process his application. “The monotony is killing me,” he told me, en route to deliver some rebar. “I want to go on a raid. I want something to blow up. I want something to change today.” He wants the unknown. “Anything can happen, and it does happen. And all of the sudden your world is shattered, and everything has changed. It’s living dangerously. You’re living on the edge. And you’re the baddest motherfucker around.”

Mortal danger heightens the senses. That is simple animal instinct. We’re more aware of how our world smells and sounds and tastes. This distorts and enriches experiences. Now I can have everything, but it’s not as good as when I could have none of it. McCarthy and I stood on a rooftop one afternoon in Iraq running through a long list of the food we wanted. We made it to homemade pizza and icy beer when someone loosed a long burst of gunfire that cracked over our heads. We ran to the other side of the rooftop, but the gunman had disappeared down a long alleyway. Today my memory of that pizza and beer is stronger than if McCarthy and I had sat down together with the real thing before us.

And today we even speak with affection of wrestling a dead man into a body bag, because that was then. The bullet had laid his thigh wide open, shattered the femur, and shredded the artery, so he’d bled out fast, pumping much of his blood onto the sidewalk. We unfolded and unzipped the nylon sack and laid it alongside him. And then we stared for a moment, none of us ready to close that distance. I grabbed his forearm and dropped it, maybe instinct, maybe revulsion. He hovered so near this world, having just passed over, that he seemed to be sucking life from me, pulling himself back or taking me with him. He peeked at us through a half-opened eye. I stared down on him, his massive dead body, and again wrapped a hand around his wrist, thick and warm. The man was huge, taller than six feet and close to 250 pounds. We strained with the awkward weight, rolled him into the bag, and zipped him out of sight. My platoon sergeant gave two neighborhood kids five dollars to wash away the congealing puddle of blood. But the red handprint stayed on the wall, where the man had tried to brace himself before he fell. I think about him sometimes, splayed out on the sidewalk, and I think of how lucky I was never to have put a friend in one of those bags. Or be put in one myself.

But the memories, good and bad, are only part of the reason war holds its grip long after soldiers have come home. The war was urgent and intense and the biggest story going, always on the news stations and magazine covers. At home, though, relearning everyday life, the sense of mission can be hard to find. And this is not just about dim prospects and low-paying jobs in small towns. Leaving the war behind can be a letdown, regardless of opportunity or education or the luxuries waiting at home. People I’d never met sent me boxes of cookies and candy throughout my tours. When I left for two weeks of leave, I was cheered at airports and hugged by strangers. At dinner with my family one night, a man from the next table bought me a $400 bottle of wine. I was never quite comfortable with any of this, but they were heady moments nonetheless. <p. i=”” wouldn’t=”” want=”” to=”” go=”” back,=”” but=”” often=”” wish=”” were=”” there,=”” light-headed=”” in=”” the=”” 120=”” degree=”” heat=”” or=”” shivering=”” an=”” ambush=”” position,=”” tired=”” and=”” miserable,=”” studying=”” a=”” world=”” painted=”” green-and-black=”” palette=”” of=”” night=”” vision.=”” at=”” times=”” now=”” feel=”” i’m=”” moving=”” fog,=”” my=”” senses=”” covered=”” with=”” scar=”” tissue=”” grown=”” over=”” those=”” nerves=”” made=”” raw.=”” sometimes,=”” sometimes=”” think=”” war=”” think:=”” home.=”” this=”” feels,=”” just=”” for=”” moment,=”” bit=”” like=”” broken=”” heart,=”” sharp=”” stab=”” life=”” gone=”” by.=”” longing,=”” wistful.=”” try=”” picture=”” myself=”” iraq,=”” what=”” was=”” then,=”” can’t.=”” yearning=”” vague=”” emptiness.=”” <p=””>For my friends who are going back to Iraq or are there already, there is little enthusiasm. Any fondness for war is tainted by the practicalities of operating and surviving in combat. Wells and McCarthy and I can speak of the war with nostalgia because we belong to a different world now. And yet there is little to say, because we are scattered, far from those who understand.

When I came home, people often asked me about Iraq, and mostly I told them it wasn’t so bad. The first few times, my wife asked me why I had been so blithe. Why didn’t I tell them what Iraq was really like? I didn’t know how to explain myself to them. The war really wasn’t so bad. Yes, there were bombs and shootings and nervous times, but that was just the job. In fact, going to war is rather easy. You react to situations around you and try not to die. There are no electric bills or car payments or chores around the house. Just go to work, come home alive, and do it again tomorrow. McCarthy calls it pure and serene. Indeed. Life at home can be much more trying. But I didn’t imagine the people asking would understand that. I didn’t care much if they did, and often it seemed they just wanted a war story, a bit of grit and gore. If they really want to know, they can always find out for themselves. But they don’t, they just want a taste of the thrill. We all do. We covet life outside our bubble. That’s why we love tragedy, why we love hearing about war and death on the television, drawn to it in spite of ourselves. We gawk at accident scenes and watch people humiliate themselves on reality shows and can’t wait to replay the events for friends, as though in retelling the story we make it our own, if just for a moment.

We live easy third-person lives but want a bit of the darkness. War fascinates because we live so far from its realities. Maybe we’d feel differently about watching bombs blow up on TV if we saw them up close, if we knew how explosions rip the air, throttle your brain, and make your ears ring, if we knew the strain of wondering whether the car next to you at a traffic light would explode or a bomb would land on your house as you sleep. I don’t expect Iraqi soldiers would ever miss war. I have that luxury. I came home to peace, to a country that hasn’t seen war within its borders for nearly 150 years. Yes, some boys come home dead. But we live here without the other terrors and tragedies of war—cities flattened and riven with chaos and fear, neighbors killing one another, a people made forever weary by the violence.

And so I miss it.

Every day in Iraq, if you have a job that takes you outside the wire, you stop just before the gate and make your final preparation for war. You pull out a magazine stacked with thirty rounds of ammunition, weighing just over a pound. You slide it into the magazine well of your rifle and smack it with the heel of your hand, driving it up. You pull the rifle’s charging handle, draw the bolt back, and release. The bolt slides forward with a metallic snap, catching the top round and shoving it into the barrel. Chak-chuk. If I hear that a half century from now, I will know it in an instant. Unmistakable, and pregnant with possibility. On top of a diving board, as the grade-school-science explanation goes, you are potential energy. On the way down, you are kinetic energy. So I leave the gate and step off the diving board, my energy transformed.

My Hard questions revisited, expanded

My original post on hard questions is here.

I chose to revisit this topic not because my wife did anything to make me upset or not trust her, but because, during my recent trip, I had a LOT of time to sit and think. The answers are always painful to hear, and they sting every time I play the mind-movie of my interviewing her in my head. Some,people may not want ot need to hear to the levelof detail I required her to tell me. It may actually set some people back and make the reality much worse. So, why did I ask that level of detail and what did I ask?

I needed to hear everything. There is an uncountable list of reasons why, but I will recall as many of them as my fingers can type. In my gut, I knew something wasn’t right, and I had suspicions from the very beginning about AP1. When I found some evidence, I didn’t wait to find more, I just jumped the gun. She was so confident in her explanation, and I WANTED to believe her, so I did. Thus deepening the negative feelings I had about myself, those that were already present because she said that the 20 pounds I had gained made her not turned on by me, and then finding out 3 nights later that she was ok joining another couple for a threesome. Bit by bit it felt like I was losing what I imagined my life and marriage was. Soon after I discovered her attempting to have one-night stands by way of an online dating site. I thoughtwe were doing better, but I coudn’t feel the connection from her, even though she was doing and trying to act like she should. Then in April I accidentally discovered the affairs. I say accidentally because she had written some details down in her therapy ntebook so that she could confess to her therapist what she was doing, and eventually me.Thankfully, she was at work when I found out. She wasn’t at work when I found out about the online profile, she was in the middle of getting the kids to bed. She had literally just gone upstairs when I grabbed her phone, located her hidden email account, and followed the trail. I called up to her and let her know that I knew about the hidden email account, and her hidden online profile, and we would talk when she came back down.  Putting the kids to bed usually takes 3 minutes or less; she didn’t come down for 20.  I don’t blame her, I was fuming, I was animated.  I yelled, and lied to the kids, telling them that mommy and daddy were happy and just playing a game.  Later that night, I calmed down, she went on a late-night Taco Bell run for me, and then we had sex; of all things we had sex within hours of me finding out about her attempts to have one-night stands.

So, back to the point.  After spending so much time thinking that everything was wrong because there were things wrong with me, I just lost complete trust in myself.  I felt what was going on around me, I just chose to ignore it and place my trust in my wife.  After all, she has my best interests in mind, and if I can’t trust anyone else I should be able to trust her, right?  That is why I asked for the most minute details.  I lived in a HUGE vacuum of truth and honesty for months, the whole time thinking I was doing something wrong, or that things about me (like my weight or unwillingness to let her have sex with another woman AND her husband at the same time!) were wrong.  What did the details actually do for me?

They gave me a sense of control, of reality.  What I was torturing myself with in my head was FAR worse than reality, although the reality still stung very badly.  I had her run me through her first sexual encounter with each affair partner.  No stone left un-turned.  What did I ask?

I asked her to give me every action she, the AP, or they together, did from the time she decided that she was going to go to their home and have sex, until she left.  As she began recounting the events, she was very uncomfortable about giving details.  Her initial recollection involved her going over there, kissing on the couch, going down on him, he going down on her, him finishing and her leaving.  Not enough detail for me.  I wanted to know what pushed her over the line, made her want to go over to AP1’s house.  I asked her what she was thinking and what she was feeling when she decided; she was invited by text message after she worked out with him.  I asked what the drive over there was like, how was traffic, how much attention was she paying to driving and what she was thinking, how her body felt (shaky, calm) and all of those things again after she pulled in his driveway.  Following that, I wanted to know about the short amount of kissing; was he good at it, was it enjoyable, how did it make you feel, what did it make you think about.  What made her decide to go down on him, was he already hard, what his size and shape were, were his pants still on, did he wear underwear, how was he positioned, how were you positioned.  Then I asked about him going down on her, did he ask her if he could, was he good at it, how was she positioned, how was he positioned, was it hard, soft or mixture, was it enjoyable, how did it make her feel, what did it make her think about, did she ever feel like any of it was wrong.  Then I asked her for details about the sex: how was she positioned, how was he positioned, was he in it for him or did he want her to get some enjoyment, did he thrust harder or softer, did he go fast or slow, did he make her wet, who put the condom on, what brand was it, did he cum in her, how long did it take, were her eyes open/did she look into his eyes during all of this, how did it make her feel, what did it make her think.  I asked about lighting in the room, what time of day it was, what the house smelled like, if the air was easy to breathe or felt thick, was she sweating, what was the temperature like, what did the texture of the couch cushions feel like, what did the carpet feel like?  What did the drive home feel like, how did she feel when she saw me for the first time after having the affair.  I asked if it ever occurred that the next day was our 6 year wedding anniversary.

I asked the same questions about the second AP, and I asked more questions about subsequent encounters with them.  She actually had sex with him twice in the restaurant, and gave him oral sex separately, once in the restaurant.  I asked if she loved them, if either of them loved her, what did she tell them about me to justify her actions to them (she said she couldn’t remember everything she told them on this subject), if I ever came into her thoughts during her romps with them.

This is actually a very difficult thing to write, I can hear all of her answers in my head, and I can feel everything I felt when I heard them then, now, as I type this.  Right now, we’re sitting at just over 4 months from when I found out.  Back to how it made me feel in control.

It made me feel like I could trust myself again, because I could feel what was going on, I knew I wasn’t crazy, my mind just hadn’t caught up to my body yet on what the truth really was.  It softened the blow of what I imagined in my head had actually happened, and it helped me speed up the process as far as internalizing and torturing myself.  Remember, I was still under the feeling that I was all sorts of fucked up, physically and mentally, and that all of this was my fault-even if she did say that it wasn’t me.

When I talked, I felt like I was in a position of being informed.  There was an added benefit of forcing her to admit to herself everything that she had done and how she felt when she was doing.

There are still some issues that will heal over time.  I recently drafted an agreement for us about how to behave, how to treat each other, and how to communicate.  She wasn’t too happy about it, not at all.  Each item in the agreement applied to both of us equally, and nothing specifically targeted her because of her actions.  I did it at my therapist’s recommendation, reinforced by a few other people who have done things along the same lines.  Almost all of my issues right now stem from a feeling of having no control over my things that happen in my life.  This agreement was my attempt to regain some control and make myself feel safe again, at least at home. I still haven’t really talked to my wife about putting it up here, we may just leave that little as a private thing between us.

Interesting to note, that she had the same kind of behavior with the boyfriend she had for years, just before she left him, and later we got back together and got married.  She was open about what she had done behind her boyfriend’s back.  I wondered before we got married if she would ever do that to me; she had already proven that she could do it to someone.  I knew she loved me, I could feel her love.  Every now and then when I couldn’t, after we were married, I wondered if she was behaving the same way and I just didn’t know it.  It’s hard knowing what happened, it’s almost just as hard knowing that it was because she was in a manic episode; I can hold her responsible, but it isn’t fully her fault.  It is difficult to be mad at her under those circumstances.  I love her so much, I know she loves me.  She’s the best thing that ever happened to me.  We have times now where one or both of us isn’t connected to the other, and that kind of thing is going to happen after having this kind of traumatic stress placed on the marriage.  For 4 months though, I think we’re doing alright.  I can still say that, even though she hurt me more than anything or anyone ever has, she is the best thing that ever happened to me, and I am happy to be married to her.  She is a wonderful person, she just did some bad things.  She’s getting better, I’m getting better, we’re getting better.

Adding the color

Using layers, what I will eventually end up with is a brand new picture in color. This is what i came up with while waiting for Delta to fix the 2nd aircraft I had to board and debark from because of mechanical failure, at the same airport.

“I am the Master of my fate; I am the Captain of my soul.”

My new toy

This is a non-dirty tag cloud post! Traded an xd45c to a dude for his Sign Sauerkraut P226. This pistol currently has a 22LR caliber slide, barrel and magazine; I can get a slide, barrel and magazine(s) in 9mm, 40S&W or 357 SIG. Definitely going after 9mm, although 357 SIG sounds enticing. I had a P220 (45 caliber, can’t be a smaller caliber in that frame) and a 22 slide. I miss the feel of a Sign 22X series in my hand. SEALs are generally issued a P226 variant with a mil-std rail as opposed to the usual rail.


text:
City to release budget February 26

City set to table 2018 budget

The Portage Citizen

Appearing as a delegation at the Feb. 12, 2018 Portage la Prairie City Council meeting, Shane Moffatt learned he will doing what every other citizen curious about the city’s 2018 budget must: wait until Feb. 26 when it is tabled.

Moffat was seeking assurances money earmarked last year from the accommodation tax to improve ball diamonds would be forthcoming in the 2018 city budget.

“On Feb. 26 the budget is coming down,” Portage la Prairie Mayor Irvine Ferris answered Moffet. “You and a lot of other groups in Portage will have answers after that.

During a post meeting interview Ferris said the cost of building a new causeway is included in the 2018 budget under the city’s debt management plan.

Will the causeway be funded in this year’s budget? “I believe so…it should be,” the mayor said.

“What I can tell you about the budget,” he adds, “for this council’s term, the last council and for the past seven or eight budgets, we’ve endeavoured to not necessarily not do increases, but certainly lower the amount it is increased every single.”

The city’s 2017 budget was held to a zero per cent increase.

“That’s a huge challenge and that was one of our goals again this year,” Ferris said.

The mayor and Finance Committee Chair Brent Budz both understand Portage la Prairie’s mill rate is the third highest in Manitoba.

“That’s not good and it is taking a concerted effort to move ourselves into a position that is more in the middle for competitive reasons. At the same time, you want to maintain services and often there are new challenges with infrastructure.”

You must be logged in to post a comment Login


text:
NYC Shop Visit: Shut Skateboards Feb 5, 2010

Shut Skatedecks, hand-made in the USA

Yesterday on my lunch break, I went over to the Shut Skateboard’s shop on the LES. Matt Terwilliger ( @MATTERWILLIGER ) works at the shop and I hadn’t actually been to it before. Not that I didn’t know what or who Shut was, but unfortunately, I haven’t been into skateboarding as much now as I was earlier in my life. Like most skaters in the 90’s, I grew up skateboarding and looking to NYC for inspiration. There was somethign about the street skating scene in NYC that was unprecedented; Cali couldn’t touch it. It was, well, raw as fuck.

Shut was started by one of the East Coast’s pioneers in skateboarding, Rodney Smith. In 1986, he started Shut and the NYC skate scene was never the same. Soon Shut had made a name for itself in the underground skateboarding world and still, to this day, their boards are made in the USA.

Their iconic decks are still in production.

Skate decks

… and as I said, still made in the USA.

Matt gave me the tour and showed some love to Animal, another NYC area born company.

Mutant Zine c. 1986 NYC

One of the things Matt showed me was Mutant Zine. One of his friend’s projects growing up. Who didn’t have a friend with a zine in the 80’s and 90’s? This is a pretty significant zine though, it documented skateboarding and bmx in NYC during the 80’s. This particular issue was from 1986.

Street riding – Mutant Zine

Here’s Matt, doing something that was still in its infancy, riding street on his BMX with a wallride. Look at that bike!

Rodney’s BMW

When you start a NYC company, you look to other NYC-based companies when you want something. Rodney went to Brooklyn Machine Works, years ago to pick up a bike.

DT sizing

As he walked through the BMW facilities, he found a massive tube. He showed it to Doc and Joe and said “I want this on my bike, somewhere”. The guys used it for his downtube. To give you an idea of the shear scale of this thing, here’s a Autobahn skate wheel. Nuts!

Rodney BMW typeface

BMW hooked him up with a nice decal too.

Matt’s Gangsta

To add to the patriotism, Matt’s Gangsta Track really hits the “Made in the USA” theme on the head.

Down to the barends.

Bill Thomas

Inside the shop, there’s a small exhibition showcasing the photography of Bill Thomas.

Photo wall

I’m still getting the hang of this camera and originally, I wasn’t going to use this photo but it came out kinda cool. It shows you the work without showing it clearly, so now you have to go to the shop to check it out.

If you’re strolling, riding or skating in the LES, swing through Shut and see Matt. Thanks for the tour man! Matt also works at Grove St. Bicycles in Jersey City, so check that spot out too! Oh, I forgot to mention, there are more photos on my Flickr; some other shots of Rodney’s bike too.

Shut Skateboards
158 Orchard St
New York City 10002


text:
• Free Shipping On All Orders Over $150

D R Harris

Arlington Bath and Shower Gel

£ 27

Not in stock

  • Product Notes

    The Arlington Bath and Shower Gel, part of the D R Harris' best-selling collection, is a rejuvenating and fresh product that will leave the skin feeling soothed and pleasantly scented with the classic blend of citrus and fern.

    For any questions and styling advice, please contact us at: shop@therakemagazine.com.

  • Size Notes

  • Materials and Care Notes

    Made in England

  • Delivery & returns

    This product is in the UK. It will be dispatched in 3-5 working day(s).

    We very much hope that you'll enjoy your purchases. Should you need to return an item, we'll happily collect it from your home or office free of charge.

    Terms and conditions apply

The Story

Founded in 1790, D R Harris began its journey as an apothecary on St. James Street, with Henry Harris, surgeon, and Daniel Rotely, pharmaceutical chemist, at the helm. Establishing themselves with a reputation for lavender water, classic colognes and English flower perfumes, the brand strives to continue its legacy into the 21st century and is the royal chemist supplier to the Queen and Prince Phillip. Its offering today, including generous gifting sets, is the result of hundreds of years of expertise and dedication to the industry.

Our Customer Services team is available to assist with any questions and styling advice. Emailshop@therakemagazine.com

United Kingdom: +44 20 3856 3886
United States: +1 (888) 979-7507
Canada: +1 (855) 999-3770
Australia: +61 1800 961 301
Hong Kong: +852 3008 3688
France: +33 7 57 90 40 90
Others: +44 20 3856 3886
(Monday to Friday, from 10am to 6pm, BST, London Time)


text:
1 In Uncategorized

The Wiggles Big Show {Canadian Tour}

I never thought I would be one of those moms.
The Wiggles
I learned last Wednesday that The Wiggles were coming to Canada for a tour of “The Wiggles Big Show” and immediately let my friend and colleague know since her daughter is a HUGE fan and one of the best little dancers out there (even at 16 months old!). Being the organized and prepared Mamas that we are, we both started booking hotel rooms just in case in various locations to be prepared in case we didn’t get the first location on our respective lists.
The tickets went on sale on Friday at 10am so we knew that although we would both be at work there would be no meetings scheduled at 10am that day – We are both dedicated employees, but are first and foremost two Mamas that want to do anything and everything to keep our little ones as happy as possible.
Then Friday came… I sat at my desk nervous that I wouldn’t get tickets and almost shaking as I hit refresh to “get in”. Seriously, I never in a million years thought I would be the mom that was nervously typing in her name and overwhelmed with excitement because I actually got tickets for The Wiggles Big Show.
Parents going crazy over the “in” thing at Christmas makes 100 times more sense to me now… Although I am extremely hopeful that I never end up in a department store brawl over a toy, haha.
Is anyone else going to see The Wiggles during their Canadian tour?! Are you as excited as my colleague and I, or I mean, our little ones… hahaha 🙂
I hope you all were able to get tickets! Can’t wait!
My shoes for that: Emma’s dance shoes
The Wiggles

You Might Also Like

1 Comment

  • Reply
    shaik sameera
    December 14, 2017 at 1:37 pm

    This is a appropriate blog for everyone who is wishes to find out about this topic. You understand a great deal its practically challenging to argue with you (not that I just would want?HaHa). You certainly put a brand new spin on a topic thats been discussed for years. Great stuff, just fantastic! yepme offers

  • Leave a Reply


text:
Connectivity is crucial for the hospitality industry

Earlier this month, the American Hotel & Lodging Association (AHLA) published the results of a comprehensive Lodging Survey, a detailed assessment of advancements in hospitality amenities, guest services, sustainability, and technology. As the survey confirms, consumers expect “seamless transitions” between their everyday lives and their lives on the road.

In addition, the report notes that the shift towards mobile remains a priority, as more and more guests use apps to access hospitality services. Repurposing mobile devices as room keys have also more than doubled in popularity, while mobile device check-in remains on-trend with participation from more than 80 percent of all mid-price and higher segment properties.

According to a separate, 2019 HIS survey, the number of guests traveling with smartphones now stands at a staggering total of 98.5 percent (although only 17 percent of guests are wearing smartwatches). Moreover, the number of hotel guests attempting to connect more than one device increased to 76 percent in 2019, up from 67 percent in 2015. Additional key statistics from the 2019 HIS survey include:

  • 84 percent of hoteliers agree that casting is an expected in-room amenity worthy of investment.
  • Respondents want to cast a range of apps on guestroom television screens, such as Facebook (71 percent). Other apps commonly accessed by hospitality guests include Instagram (54 percent) and LinkedIn (32 percent).
  • 75 percent of guests want to access Netflix while traveling, with Amazon Prime coming in second place at 45 percent, Spotify in third place at 28 percent and Hulu in fourth place at 24 percent.

Given the above-mentioned survey results, it is hardly surprising that more than 90 percent of guests feel that access to a hotel’s Wi-Fi service is “very important,” while 58 percent say the quality of a hotel’s Wi-Fi would “highly-likely” affect their booking decision. In addition, more than 75 percent believe the unavailability of free Wi-Fi would be a “deal breaker” in any booking decision.

“Today’s hoteliers are now acknowledging the crucial influence that Wi-Fi plays on guest satisfaction scores, booking decisions and loyalty,” the report states. “An overwhelming 94 percent of 2019’s hospitality survey respondents, in fact, consider it to be very important. When compared to other guest amenities such as guestroom televisions or on-site restaurants, hoteliers additionally ranked complimentary Wi-Fi as being most vital to guests, at 95 percent.”

Despite the obvious importance both guests and hotels place on fast and ubiquitous Wi-Fi connectivity, 82 percent of respondents say poor signal coverage is often an issue, while 81 percent of guests experienced a poor Wi-Fi connection during the past 12 months.

As we’ve previously discussed on The Ruckus Room, if hotel guests can’t maintain a strong, consistent wireless connection – for all their devices and everywhere on a property – they won’t be coming back. Similarly, guests expect reliable mobile coverage throughout a hotel, along with “smart” rooms that support a wide range of IoT devices and automatically adjust to fit their personal preferences. The hotel network has transformed from an amenity to a requirement – and is now something that is clearly foundational to hotel operations.

Interested in learning more about Wi-Fi and hospitality? You can check out our hospitality solutions page and our article archive on the subject.

No Comments Yet

Comments are closed