What Followers of Jesus Might Learn from Tuesday’s Elections

The final results are not yet in from the elections on Tuesday (and some won’t be known for several days), but the rejection of Donald Trump’s presidency and policies was so deep and wide that Democrats will take control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate by large margins for the remainder of Trump’s second term. Followers of Jesus vary significantly in their thinking and actions, including their politics, but I suggest that now is a good time for all Christians to reflect upon Jesus’ teaching in light of the election results. Repentance is not easyl This will require courage because it will demand a change in our thinking and in our actions.

Here are some key teachings of Jesus that seem pertinent for all Christians whether they lean Republican, Democrat, or independent.

Truth is vitally important. Jesus affirmed that he was the way, the truth, and the life. His followers should walk in the truth, big and small. A person’s “yes” should mean “yes”, and “no” should be a clear “no”. Although Donald Trump has some virtues, truth telling is not one of them. During these last two years, he has repeatedly lied about the war with Iran, the economy, inflation, ICE, the Epstein files, and tariffs. Sadly, most Republican leaders in government have not challenged these lies (some notable exceptions have been Lisa Murkowski and Thomas Massie). Many self-identified Christians also fell into the unethical trap of the “end justifies the means” and tried to justify and/or excuse the president’s repeated falsehoods.
“Christian Nationalism” is neither Christian nor aligns with the way of Jesus. The gospel is good news precisely because it is offered freely. When politicians try to impose religion on their fellow citizens, it usually distorts the faith. Historical examples include Constantine’s Christendom, the Spanish Inquisition, and even Hitler’s use of Christianity with his Nazi soldiers. In our contemporary democracies, although citizens can derive their ethical positions from religious sources, policy implementation should be promoted by persuasion, using generally acceptable evidence and legislative procedures.
Money, and what it can buy (food, homes, health care) can be an instrument for human good. Nevertheless, the love (idolatry?) of money leads to all kinds of evil. Followers of Jesus should be concerned when big money gets involved in the electoral process, especially when it is for one political party. Elon Musk is the world’s richest person who became much wealthier these past two years, in part, due to political favors he and his companies received from the current administration. He “gave” $445 million to the Republican Party in this election season even though this amount of money was not able to stop the blue tsunami. Most citizens would describe this practice (money in exchange for favors) as corruption.
Followers of Jesus need to select their leaders and sources of information with great discernment. Billy Graham tended to be fairly cautious in his political recommendations. His son, Franklin Graham, has not been so reserved. In his total support of the Trump regime, he has abandoned some essential values near to the heart of God: mercy, justice, humility, and the Lord’s love for the most vulnerable among us.
There are some pressing issues where followers of Jesus might offer some insights.
- The war with Iran. This was a bad war from the beginning. What suggestions do Christian peacemakers offer to end it justly?
- Putin’s invasion of and war with Ukraine. How should we stop a tyrannical aggressor who is killing thousands of innocent civilians?
- Immigration. What kinds of legislation and implementation demonstrate God’s love for the foreigner and prudent economic concerns?
- Affordability. Which aspects of the “Big Beautiful Bill” and tariffs should be repealed, and which ones should be kept?
- Fairness in redistricting and gerrymandering. In a ten-district state where 52% of its residents vote for party A, how many representatives should party A receive? 5, 6, 9? Why?

Pride goes before a fall. Democratic leaning followers of Jesus should not celebrate for long. American people want to see results.

Woe to Those who Call Evil Good and Good Evil! Putin is Not a Great “Humanitarian”!

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil! Putin is not a great “humanitarian”!

The Hebrew Scriptures describe a horrific period in Israel’s history in which the ethical norms of the nation were totally upside down. The nation had lost its way. God raised up the prophet Isaiah to rectify the situation. Isaiah’s message was quite clear as he denounced the moral “experts” of his day:

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil,
who put darkness for light and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. (Isaiah 5:20)

Isaiah’s message is just as relevant today. Donald Trump sent his special envoy Steve Witkoff to Russia to schedule high level talks between the Russian autocrat Vladimir Putin and President Trump. International diplomacy can be quite difficult as envoys and ambassadors must deal with unsavory leaders. Nevertheless, Witkoff failed miserably in his conversation with Putin. Putin released an American citizen from a Russian jail and Witkoff responded by praising Putin as a great “humanitarian”.

Putin is many things, but he is not a humanitarian. He rules over Russia with a heavy hand. He has imprisoned many of his citizens for just expressing their criticisms of Russia’s injustice. He invaded Ukraine four years ago and his war has caused thousands of military deaths. In addition, his missiles and drones have targeted civilian populations in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities, killing hundreds of innocent civilian. The U.S. Congress sanctioned Putin with the goal of quickly ending the war, but those sanctions were recently weakened by our own administration’s deal to purchase large quantities of Russian oil. Putin is savvy and astute and has played his opponents as fools. He is not a humanitarian. Woe to those who today heap false praise upon Putin!

Republican Senator Schmitt’s “Gotcha” Plan Backfires: Hypocrisy on Full Display

Yesterday, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a televised hearing of Jack Smith regarding his prosecution of Donald Trump for two serious and illegal actions: his attempt to overturn the 2020 election by urging his followers to storm the Capitol on January 6, 2021 to block the certification process and his reckless handling of sensitive government documents at his Mar-A-Lago residence. The partisan goals were obvious. Democrats wanted to make public one more time the damning evidence against Trump. Republicans wanted to discredit Smith by forcing him to commit perjury. The Republican plan backfired,

GOP Senator Eric Schmitt repeatedly accused Smith of attendung an NBA game in Atlanta allegedly to collude with Fani Willis about the Trump case. In fact, Sen, Schmitt made a huge sloppy mistake. Smith was in Maryland to watch the Iowa Hawkeyes, not in Georgia to watch the Atlanta Hawks. Usually, political hypocrisy is not so sloppy and obvious. Senator Schmitt (and other hypocrites), turn away from your perjury traps and start solving our nation’s problems

Mr. Trump, Here is Good Advice from the Good Book regarding an Exit from Iran

Although you have frequently claimed to have helped the Christian cause more than any other politician, you have also frequently denied a basic Christian doctrine: the forgiveness of your sins. You have often said you have never asked God for forgiveness because you don’t acknowledge any sins that need to be forgiven. Two passages from the Good Book seem quite pertinent to your situation. The Apostle John wrote, “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (I John 1:8-9) You claim that you are without sin generally, and specifically regarding your decision to go to war with Iran. Just this past weekend, you responded to questions about the war and the increase in oil/gas prices by saying you will “never apologize” for taking us to war nor for the resulting rise in the price of gasoline.

In the Biblical book of James, we read about the origin of wars. “Where do wars and fights come from among you? Do they not come from your desires for pleasure that war in your members?” (James 4:1) James provides a general principle that wars are usually the expression and extension of human selfishness. For those who claim that a specific war is an exception, that it is “justified”, the burden of proof lies with them.

Let’s unpack this a bit. When the word “sin” is mentioned, many people think of religious actions against God. On the contrary, the Bible has a different understanding of sin. Precisely because all people are made in God’s image, all human actions against our neighbors, near or far, are also directed toward their Creator. When John the Baptist proclaimed his message of repentance from evil, he emphasized economic sins, whether it was apathy when we are faced with our neighbor’s hunger or poverty, or the sins of bribery and extortion (Luke 3:1-20). This pointing out of human sin is called good news (gospel) because it is an essential component for repentance and forgiveness. The prophet Amos teaches us an additional, important truth, especially for people who rule in public office: many sins are not individualistic, but national. Racism, war, inhumane treatment of foreigners, and national indifference to the suffering of people in other countries, are also denounced as sin against their Maker. (Amos 2:1-3:15)

Therefore, Mr. President, I ask you to look at the following evidence and to examine your heart regarding your war against Iran. I am inviting you to have a political conversion.

Your war with Iran is illegal. Our US Constitution appropriately assigns war responsibilities to Congress, not to the President. No one person, not even the President, is allowed to take our country to war. If a President believes war should be declared, he or she should go to Congress and ask them to make a Declaration of War (as took place in World War II). If the President believes a true emergency requires an immediate military response of self defense, he or she is allowed to do so, but then needs to obtain congressional approval within 48 hours via the War Powers Resolution. You also did not bring the United Nations into deliberations as required for member nations.
Your war against Iran broke your own campaign promises of not taking our nation into war, especially “endless wars in the Middle East”. As a result, your war was not supported by our citizens (about 65% of the public are against this war, according to national polls).
You never presented a clear goal for the war to the American people. You have jumped from one goal to another as if you were grasping for straws (regime change, the re-opening of the Strait of Hormuz, deterring the development of nuclear weapons). This last goal is seen as a sham because you claimed you had “obliterated” Iran’s uranium stockpiles a year ago.
Your war with Iran showed woefully little preparation. You said it would last only 2-4 weeks and we are now at the six-month mark. There were no exit strategies and we still have no end in sight. Supply problems on the USS Abraham Lincoln and a significant depletion of defensive missiles were not planned for.
Although the Iranian takeover of the Strait of Hormuz had been anticipated by every presidency during the last five decades, your administration seems to have been caught totally ill-prepared. With some significant control over the Strait, Iran now has more leverage than it did before the war began.
A negotiated and just peace deal is not on the horizon. On at least 38 occasions, you have made public predictions that a peace accord was “at hand”, but then Iran strings your envoys on again and again. Neither the US people, nor our allies, nor Iran believe you and your baseless promises.
You did not consult with our NATO allies before going to war, nor with our Arab friends in the region. In fact, this week you repeatedly threatened to strike militarily our ally Oman for not supporting your war!

For all of the above-mentioned facts, your taking our country into war with Iran was a huge mistake with serious political, economic, and ethical consequences for Americans and for the whole world. This is the bad news. The good news is that you are not beyond hope. While many of your critics think you cannot change, I believe in a compassionate and all-powerful God. While we have breath, there is hope we might experience a genuine change in our lives. This requires true repentance on your part leading to a profound transformation. This will not be easy because you have surrounded yourself with people who tell you how “great” you are. Do not believe them. They are lying.

Now an exit strategy. Bombing Iran has not worked. Bullying other countries with tariffs has not worked either. Inept negotiators have not had success. But if you would truly and publicly confess your political sin, the world would be shocked and amazed! If your conversion were genuine, international offers to negotiate a just end to the war would come pouring in. I suggest the United Nations as a good first place to start. This could become the beginning of a new world order (and perhaps even a Nobel Peace Prize). Mr. President, the ball is in your court.

The Senate Judiciary Committee forwarded Todd Blanche’s Nomination to the Full Senate. Have they Lost their Conscience and their Spine?

Earlier today, the Senate Judiciary Committee forwarded Todd Blanche’s nomination to the full Senate. Have they lost their conscience and their spine?

This was not a minor congressional decision of little importance. No, this is about our country’s top law enforcement official, the position of Attorney General and Director of the Justice Department. This decision is about the moral integrity of our potential Attorney General, the moral integrity of our Senators, and … our own moral integrity.

Todd Blanche used to be President Trump’s personal criminal defense lawyer and is currently the Acting Attorney General (in replacement of Pam Bondi, who resigned the AG position). The vote in the full Senate would probably take place this week and would make Blanche the permanent replacement for the Attorney General position. There are three major ethical issues at stake:

The 1.776 billion dollar “Anti-Weaponization-Slush” Fund (to compensate some citizens for alleged discrimination against them by the (Biden) Justice Department. This would include those who injured police during their participation in the January 6, 2021 insurrection in Washington, DC. These Americans were found guilty by juries of their peers.)
The exemption from an IRS audit for Trump, his sons, some of his friends and the Trump Organization. This is a special, unique exemption in US history. It essentially says that Trump and his friends are “are above the law”.
The Epstein Files. When she was Attorney General, Pam Bondi affirmed that Deputy AG Todd Blanche was the official responsible for implementing the congressional bill which required the names of the perpetrators to be revealed, and the identities of the victims be protected. Blanche did just the opposite and still has not finished the job. He also changed Epstein’s guilty friend Ghislaine Maxwell’s prison location to a “plush country club level” setting. This is, by far, Blanche’s most horrific ethical failure. The female victims (who have been truly heroic) deserve justice.

Two Republican senators (John Cornyn and Tom Tillis) who had been blocking Blanche’s confirmation for Attorney General gave him their blessing yesterday, after Blanche promised — in writing — to scale back the very lucrative deal (#2 and 3 above) the Department of Justice had cut with Trump. Legal experts agree that these written documents that Blanche signed are NOT legally binding.

The ethical dimensions of these three issues are not gray. We know what is right and what is wrong.

The date for the final Senate vote has not yet been fixed. Unless three senators (Murkowski, Collins, others?) find some courage and integrity, we the people of the United States have lost our way.

Ending the War with Iran is Getting Further Away…Trump’s Four Bad Options

Over the last 24 hours, the war with Iran escalated…again. Iran targeted American forces in Jordan. There were also attacks in Iraq, while a U.S. tanker was among two ships that caught fire in Egypt from being hit by Iranian drones. President Trump threatened to retaliate with heavy bombings which have occurred since yesterday. Perhaps to introduce some levity into the situation, the President said, “Now it is our turn.”

The war has reached a difficult juncture. The Memorandum of Understanding between Iran and the U.S. from last June led to a partially implemented ceasefire, but with no long-lasting results. It is obvious that President Trump wants the war to end. Multiple public opinion polls indicate that more than 60% of U.S. citizens do not approve of the war (due to ethical concerns, lack of progress, increasing gasoline prices, military deaths, expansion of the war throughout the region). What are Trump’s options?

Walk away from the war and claim victory. Trump can just bring the ships and troops back from the Middle East and claim that the war was “successful”. This is hard to square with reality. Gas prices over $4.00 scream from every gas station (due to Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz). This closure has provided Iran with more leverage, not less. There has not been any positive regime change. Iran still sits upon buried uranium reserves.
Let the war languish between escalating military strikes and fruitless ceasefires. This is not promising. Successful military strikes have not produced an end to the war. Iran has shown it can endure these attacks. Iran does not need to win, just to survive. This also involves a serious decline in U.S. reserves of ballistics, drones, and other military weapons. This option merely leads to another “endless” war in the Middle East.
Negotiate an end to the war with acceptable agreements on the difficult issues of nuclear proliferation and the Strait of Hormuz. These two issues imply that Trump has lost his strongest arguments. I cannot imagine Trump accepting these two concessions. Trump hates appearing weak.
Walk away from the war and admit that starting the war was a colossal mistake: ethical, economical, and military.

Athough this fourth option is the most honest and most courageous, I don’t believe our president is up to the task nor mature enough to do so.

The War with Iran: Trump and Hegseth want Money from Congress without Submitting to the War Powers Resolution

Earlier this week, Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair, General Dan Caine testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee. Hegseth and Caine attempted to defend President Trump’s $87.6 billion supplemental funding request for the ongoing U.S. war with Iran. The meeting was quite testy. Various Senators accused Hegseth of mismanagement of the war on several fronts. The hearing revealed several important contradictions in this war. The most obvious contradiction is that this war lacks the authorization of Congress.

Our nation’s founders, when they wrote our Constitution, made it abundantly clear that it is our Congress, not the President, who has the responsibility to declare war on foreign nations. They did not believe that one person, not even a president, should have the authority to lead us into a deadly war. If the president, as Commander in Chief, takes our country into an international conflict, he needs to get Congressional authorization for the use of the military through a War Powers Resolution.

A month ago, Congress tried to reassert its constitutional authority over military engagements by passing a resolution (H.Con.Res. 86) which directed Trump to remove U.S. Armed Forces from hostilities with Iran. The resolution was agreed to by both chambers of Congress on June 23. Nevertheless, it was passed as a “concurrent resolution” which means it does NOT carry the force of law. Its primary purpose is to express Congress’s position and attempt to influence executive action under the War Powers Resolution framework. Just this morning, the House of Representatives passed a stronger resolution in which four Republican Representatives joined Democrats in voting for the bill.

Why are very compliant Republicans in Congress finally beginning to break ranks with President Trump over the war? The simple and true answer is that the war is not popular with the American people. Recent polls indicate that less than 30% of our citizens support the war. Its objectives were never presented to the public. Was it regime change? Was it to prohibit Iran from ever developing uranium based nuclear weapons? (By the way, didn’t Trump “obliterate” all of Iran’s uranium last summer?) Opening the Strait of Hormuz was NOT an original objective, because the Strait was not closed at the beginning of the war.

A most powerful reason is economical. Gasoline prices are again above $4 per gallon. Brent Crude oil passed $100 a barrel last night.

We need to continue to shine the light of truth wherever it is needed.

Vice President Vance and Secretary of State Rubio Disagree with President Trump over Tolls for Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. You won’t Believe Who Backed Down.

On Monday, President Trump announced on the Fox News program “Fox & Friends” that the United States was going to reinstate the blockade of Iranian ports and were “going to get paid for guarding” the Strait of Hormuz, adding that the United States “will be reimbursed, at the rate of 20 percent,” for all cargo that passes through the waters. This put the president in a bind with his inner circle, because for decades the Strait had been considered an international waterway and therefore, not subject to a toll by any country. Just last month on an official trip through the Middle East, Secretary of State Marco Rubio referred to the Strait: “No country is allowed to charge tolls or fees on an international waterway. That’s existing international law. That’s the way it is in international waterways all over the world, and that’s the way we expect it’ll be here.”

Mr. Rubio made his announcement before he attended a meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council, a group of oil-exporting Gulf Arab countries. After the meeting ended, the United States signed a joint declaration of the Council affirming that the nations “rejected any tolls, fees or attempts to assert control over the strait.”

Vice President JD Vance affirmed a similar position on June 18 as he discussed a cease-fire deal between the United States and Iran that was aimed at reopening the waterway. During a press conference that same day, Vance affirmed, “We believe international waterways should be free of tolls.”

Later on Tuesday, President Trump made a complete reversal and announced there would no 20% toll. Instead of a toll, nations would invest in the American economy. What led up to this change of plans? Three explanations have been offered.

The 20% toll would be extremely costly for Arab oil-exporting countries in the region including allies of the United States.
Legal experts and the International Maritime Organization criticized the idea of a toll because such charges violate maritime law on international waterways. It would also appear hypocritical as Trump has repeatedly claimed that Iran had no right to charge tolls on ships going through the Strait of Hormuz.
Shipping companies warned that such a high fee would reduce traffic through the Strait. Experts predicted that the fee would increase global oil prices, potentially raising U.S. gasoline costs by 30–40 cents per gallon.

Vance and Rubio are not my favorite politicians, in part, because they are “yes men” and they do not have a reputation for telling the truth. Nevertheless, on this issue, they were right. I am glad Trump changed his position, whatever were his reasons. Submitting to international law is important, especially for Trump.

Cheap Patriotism: A critique from the Scriptures regarding exceptionalism and “love for one’s country”

The Fourth of July has come and gone and the theme of patriotism often appeared in our social media. Given that there are many, diverse uses and misuses of the topic of patriotism, I suggest that the Bible offers us surprising and helpful corrections.

One initial challenge before us is trying to define patriotism in a functional way. Most popular definitions use phrases like “love for one’s country”, usually suggesting that we should have a deeper love for our nation than we express toward other countries. We need greater precision with this kind of definition. We use the word “love” in a variety of contradictory ways. The object of our love frequently produces in us an extreme self-centered happiness as in one of my favorite phrases, “I love chocolate!”. Note well that chocolate can contribute to one’s happiness while at the same time not contribute to one’s health. This is a cheap, albeit common, use of “love” in English in the Unite States today. The Bible provides a sharp contrast to this cheapened use of “love”. Christians used the Greek word agape to mean seeking the multifaceted well-being of other people, usually at the expense of one’s own interests. It is self-giving rather than self-seeking. The object of agape is a person or a group of people, not things. Let us now look at an area where typical or traditional patriotism is not agape-patriotism at all.

Exceptionalism is the false belief that one’s group or country are God’s special favorites and therefore are ethically “above the law”. Although the Word of God describes the Jews as God’s chosen people, there is no place in Scripture that even hints that God does not hold them accountable for their actions. To the contrary! If Jews have more revelation about God, they are responsible to act more justly, not less. “To whom much is given much is required.” (Luke 12:48) John the Baptist warned people not to trust in their “exceptionalism” by claiming Abraham was their “father”. Like everyone else, they needed a deep conversion of repentance in which they would show by their actions that they had returned to God. (Luke 3:1-20 and Amos 2-3, especially 3:13-15)

There are many Christians in the United States who claim that our nation is exceptional, that is, God’s favorite people. This claim is not found any place in the Bible! Although many of our founders had a genuine deep Christian faith, many did not. Jefferson published a “Thomas Jefferson Bible“, in which he removed every reference to the supernatural or miraculous action. Jefferson and Washingtom, like many of our national founders, were more deists than Biblical theists, that is, their God was like a watchmaker who created the world, then left it “ticking” on its own. Regarding exceptionalism, God does not give a free pass to any ethnic or national group.

A cheap patriotism wants our country to “win”, usually with the defeat of others. The Bible has a better goal, harmony and shalom for us, but also for our neighbors (Matthew 22:37-39), and even for our enemies. Agape-patriotism can transform our enemies into our friends. I don’t approve of all of our decisions in World War II, but there are a few positive examples (such as our treatment of Germany under the Marshall Plan).

We need to correct the misuse of cheap patriotism words, like “allegiance”. Almost all who believe in a Creator God who is just (such as in Judaism, Christianity, or Islam) would claim that their allegiance to their God is more important than any loyalty to a country. So what do we mean when we say “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America…”? Surely it means a lesser allegiance, a limited loyalty. But history reveals many problems. Followers of the great theistic religions agree that God said, “Thou shall not kill”. Nevertheless, there are horrible examples (Germans in the time of Hitler) who killed other human beings without any ethical qualms, and all in the name of a cheap patriotism or religious nationalism.

A cheap patriotism leads to a nation becoming more dominant or cruel. A genuine agape-patriotism leads a nation to become more like a city on a hill or a bright beacon of light and hope for all…no exceptions.

How Do You Spell “Vanity”? T.R.U.M.P.

Of course, the final verdict and evaluation regarding President Trump are still out. The consequences of his policies will not be known for decades to come. The majority of U.S. citizens (including myself) do not approve of Trump’s actions (tariffs, war with Iran, denial of climate change, weaponization of the government, treatment of immigrants, reduction in health care, just to name a few).

Nevertheless, an overwhelming majority of citizens would agree that Trump is the vainest of all the presidents we have ever had. His cabinet meetings seem like a praise fest to the leader of a cult. His appointment of people to important positions (like Pulte to direct the Department of National Intelligence) is based on fealty to him, not on experience or expertise. But the vainest of all is his attempt to put his name or picture on numerous monuments and/or government documents. Let me just identify some of the worst examples.

Trump’s picture on a future $250 bill. This proposal is not just an exhibition of vanity. It is also illegal. In 1866, Congress passed a law prohibiting the depiction of a living person on currency notes, bonds or securities. Another law clarifies that currency is minted in $1, $2, $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100 denominations. A $250 bill is not included.
Trump’s picture on U.S. passports. The new commemorative passport will begin to be issued in July. This decision is making waves as Trump makes history by being the first living president featured inside a U.S. passport. The inside cover will display Trump’s portrait alongside his signature and the Declaration of Independence.
Trump has proposed the construction of an arch between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery, without congressional approval. This arch would be more than twice as tall as the famous arch in Paris. Vietnam veterans are suing the Trump administration to halt the construction of the arch. The veterans argued that planned height — twice that of the 99-foot-tall Lincoln Memorial — would obstruct the view between the two hallowed memorials in a “disrespectful” manner. The president had been remarkably candid about the purpose of the construction. Last year, when asked who the arch was for, Trump said, “me”.
Earlier in his second presidential administration, Trump added his own name to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Last Friday, a federal judge ruled that the Center cannot be renamed without an act of Congress. The judge ruled that Trump’s name be removed from the building and its website within two weeks.

These and other acts of vanity are not helping the president. Polls show that each new proposal correlates to a drop in his approval rate. Citizens prefer that he work on the economy and affordability, not on his ego. More than scorn, Trump needs our pity. His wife, Melania, and others in his inner circle, need to lead him away from these ridiculous attempts at grandeur and towards the better path of true service of others.