“We serve a God who is never late, and never early. We serve an on-time God.” I have heard this quote many times from a lady at the Widow’s Bible Study that meets in St. Elmo. I never thought that signing up for a widows’ ministry  would be something that I would look back on as being an incredible blessing in my life—but it has been just that.

Widows’ Harvest Ministry serves widows in Chattanooga. A group of about sixty-five widows  meet at St. Elmo Baptist Church every Tuesday from 10 a.m. until 2 p.m. for a Bible study. I began going to these studies my freshman year and started to build relationships with these amazing women. These ladies come from all walks of life, are of all different ages, and have two things in common: they are devoted in their walks with Jesus, and they have lost their earthly husbands. These two things bring them together, and it shows in the way they support, love, and pray for one another.

The Covenant community is involved with this ministry through hosting a workday once a month on a Saturday morning, where we go to a widow’s home and help with yard work. We write letters to them once a month. We do special things for holidays such as making Valentine’s Day bags and sending Christmas cards. Once a semester we host a brunch in the Caudle Room and invite the widows to join us for two hours of food, fellowship, and music. They always love coming, and it’s a great way for the students who write letters to these ladies to get to meet them in person and start forming tangible relationships.

In my senior year, I can honestly say that this is the one ministry that has blessed me the most. These ladies are true prayer warriors; they love the Lord so much. We may not have the same theological views on certain things, but in a way, that is refreshing. I enjoy seeing people of different backgrounds and denominations, coming together to pray for one another, and support each other. These ladies have been there for me personally, prayed with me, and even though I am student-teaching this semester and cannot attend their studies anymore, they have written me letters. I continue to have special relationships with them and they have illustrated to me many times that the God we serve is always on time.

The Lord is never late. It’s hard when He asks us to wait for things, to not be anxious about our prayers being answered on our time. But I have gone back to that quote and reminded myself that the Lord knows exactly what He is doing. I can rest in the fact that “we serve an on-time God.” Much of this I learned from my friendships in the Widows Ministry. If you are looking for a way to get involved in Chattanooga, please consider being a part of this ministry. I can guarantee that you will be surprised with how much you are blessed in return. E-mail brooke.wilbanks@covenant.edu.

The world has shrunk considerably in the past several decades, partially due to the availability of photographs and the growing profession of photojournalism. Innovations in technology, along with the expansion of the modern global economy, make images available worldwide and allow us to take part in events around the world. However, as these images become widely available, we Americans run the risk of becoming accustomed and even feeling entitled to these photographs. This attitude often produces resentment and anger in the photographed culture. This is particularly true in the case of disasters like the earthquake in Haiti. How should Christians deal with this issue? It is clearly not an issue that can be easily resolved. We must honestly assess the consequences of our current system of photojournalism—both its advantages and disadvantages.

It is certainly true that the great number of photographers who provided us with information about the disaster risk invading Hatians’ privacy and dignity. One photojournalist admitted, “It feels awkward when you get to a scene of violence, tragedy, or chaos, et cetera, and there are more photographers around a subject than there are even people at the scene.” This seems to have happened often in Haiti’s history; one photographer who has been visiting Haiti for twenty years said, “It was normal for three to six photographers, plus the occasional TV crew, to be all working the same scene” during a Haitian crisis. In one case after this year’s earthquake, a woman stuck under rubble for over 50 hours was immediately bombarded with cameras upon being rescued. It is hard to avoid wondering how this could be done in a way that preserves her dignity. In addition, photojournalists covering the earthquake in Haiti are often the recipients of anger and resentment by Haitians who are frustrated with their lack of practical help. Time Magazine’s Jay Newton-Small tweeted on January 15th, “Haitians are furious w/ Americans & the West. They yell [profanity] and…‘put down your camera & dig’ when u drive by.” The Haitians have a point; every person taking pictures is someone who isn’t immediately helping to save lives.

It could well be argued that the value of photojournalism can overrule these moral issues. Photojournalism has much value, but here we will focus on one compelling issue: photojournalism is often instrumental in arousing compassion for those who are suffering. Surely, it might be said, the increased aid coming to Haiti as a result of the photojournalist’s efforts more than makes up for occasional loss of dignity or a journalist’s refusal to help with immediate relief.

This argument is alright as far as it goes; there is merit in taking a big-picture perspective and thinking about the long-term effects of a photo. We must make sure when trying to determine the value of this utilitarian argument, however, that we are not simply excusing our culture because we love exotic and dramatic images. It is easy for us to ignore our idolatry of the scandalous, the horrific, and the sensational when making judgments about what kinds of pictures to which we ought to have access. All too often, while we profess to be thinking about the good of all, we are really thinking in terms of our rights—to know, to see, to experience what we want. As we consider how we consume images of disasters, and what kinds of photography we should encourage, let us not use the greater good as a smokescreen for our own interests. Suffering people deserve more faithful moral reasoning than that—as does the Lord who suffered for us.

With collaboration from Matthew Baddorf, Kristin Najar, and John Stodghill

I thank God that we have been put in a school where we are encouraged to seek God’s truth wherever it may be found. But I am concerned that we are not truly submitting to the God of Truth in every part of our minds. Dawkins once said faith is “belief without evidence,” even belief against evidence. This is a terrible way of describing faith in Christ, but unfortunately, it does seem to describe the faith we often have in the wisdom of our own opinions. For me, and I suspect for many Christians, this faith in my own opinion is often idolatry: every time I ignore or suppress evidence I don’t like because I really want my opinion to be right, I am making an idol. By putting my desire to be vindicated above the facts, I am saying I care more about myself than about submitting to God’s truth. I fear that this form of sin is common in myself and others (especially when it comes to theological or political beliefs). We must set our faces like flints towards the truth because truth is where God dwells. Relentlessly working against our sinful tendency to ignore evidence that points in directions we don’t like is a part of submission to Christ.

Corporately, our refusal to critically examine our comfortable political and cultural beliefs may well be part of the reason Dawkins is so credible. If people observe Christians ignoring evidence that doesn’t support their opinions in politics or apologetics, it would be natural for the observers to believe that Christians are suppressing the truth about God as well.

A caveat is in order. I am not saying that we are called to mastery of every subject on which we have an opinion. We have much to do in the world besides study (can I get an Amen?), and it is good to trust the testimony of others, especially when they are called to a field of study and we are not. Loving God’s truth does not require omniscience. What it requires is that we be alert to the possibility that we have made our fallible beliefs an idol.

“Well,” you may say, “I certainly agree that many people don’t give enough credence to other’s points of view. But I want to know the truth, and I’ve carefully looked into the subjects I’m called to know about, so I don’t have a problem.” I used to think this way, but I’d like to call you (and myself) to a more radical obedience. Simply reading isn’t enough. I believe we must correct our sinful tendency to idolize our opinions (and through them, ourselves) by seeking out sources that will challenge our views. I have found by painful experience that even sources that try hard to be fair are often not as beneficial as sources who push things I oppose. Not only do sources that challenge me help me learn about their subject, they expose my hidden idols.

I believe our repentance from these hidden idols would powerfully impact our culture. According to columnist David Brooks, staff at Republican and Democratic congressional offices often work with completely different sets of facts, and are surprised when Brooks tells them the evidence the other side uses to support their theory. Imagine the benefit to our country if people in politics deliberately tried to find the best arguments their opponents had to offer, not just for the sake of discrediting them, but out of a sincere desire to know the truth. Even better, imagine the glory to Christ if his people led the way in going out of their way to seek truth by honestly considering the best others had to say.

I’m not saying that this is pleasant. It isn’t for me. Loving Christ by finding and studying arguments that challenge my favorite opinions is often anything but fun. It feels painful. In fact, it feels like death. But for those called to worship the crucified Truth (who is also the resurrected Life), isn’t it a death what we’re called to?

A photo of the original copyright law.

“Copyright is a form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression….[It] protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture.”*  The Constitution gives Congress the power “[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Tımes to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”  This Copyright clause, as it is often called, suggests that the purpose of copyright law is to promote creativity and ingenuity rather than hinder them.  Without this protection, copyright law suggests, many authors—whether they be artists, inventors, or scientists—would be unable to support themselves or continue creating original works.

Section 106 of Title 17 of the U.S. Code gives at least the following exclusive rights to copyright holders:

• “To reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords;
• “To distribute copies or phonorecords of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending”

The protection against infringement against these exclusive rights begins “from the time the work is created in fixed form.”  Therefore, a work does not need to be submitted to the Copyright Office or attached with a copyright notice for it to be under copyright law.

The doctrine of fair use, contained in the U.S. Copyright Law, provides for the copying and use of copyrighted material without permission under special circumstances such as criticism, teaching or research. Section 107 does not explicitly declare what constitutes fair use but rather gives four guidelines for determining fair use:

1. “the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. “the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. “the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. “the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.”

The courts consider these four guidelines to ensure that any alleged fair use of copyrighted material fits within the spirit of Copyright Law, which is to secure certain exclusive rights including reproduction and distribution to the creator.

In the 2005 case BMG Music v. Gonzalez, the defendant was charged with downloading at least 30 copyrighted songs using the Kazaa peer-to-peer network.  The defendant argued that her actions were protected by fair use because she had downloaded the songs to determine whether she should buy them, thus increasing the “potential market value” for the songs.

The court ruled that the defendant had, in fact, made infringing copies of the songs. Later, a court of appeals ruled that: “Music downloaded for free from the Internet is a close substitute for purchased music; many people are bound to keep the downloaded files without buying originals. That is exactly what Gonzalez did for at least 30 songs. It is no surprise, therefore, that the only appellate decision on point has held that downloading copyrighted songs cannot be defended as fair use, whether or not the recipient plans to buy songs she likes well enough to spring for.”  This essentially ended the discussion of whether downloading copyrighted material could be protected under fair use.

In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the peer-to-peer client Grokster was to be held accountable for how its product is used to infringe copyright. Justice David Souter said, “We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement.”  The popular music sharing site Napster was shut down for this same reason in the court case A&M Records v. Napster.

The decisions against Grokster, Napster and other file sharing sites clearly indicate that

by Heather Satterfield & Evelyn Petcher

According to the CIA Factbook, Haiti’s literacy rate, which refers to the people ages fifteen and older who can read and write, is only 52.9%. In a nation listed as one of the poorest in the world, education will be a crucial part of the rebuilding process in the aftermath of the earthquake that shook Haiti on January 12 of this year. But what kind of solution is there for an educational system that was already broken to begin with? Do they simply need better content and qualified teachers, or is there something else missing from Haiti’s situation?

Education is important to the health of a nation because it gives people hope, and shapes the next generation to look for ways to give hope to others. In an apology for the 9/11 attacks published in Time magazine, Egyptian playwright Ali Salem seeks to explain what led Muslim men to hijack the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Salem says, “We must admit that we failed to teach these people that life is worth living.” In Haiti’s educational system, it will take more than Western teachers and aid to do that; centuries of hopelessness and fatalistic voodoo beliefs have hindered its progress. Before deciding that education will fix Haiti’s problems, we might want to start by reflecting on whether we see our own education as a way to show others that life is worth living.

In I Corinthians 15, Paul reminds us that Christ’s resurrection is our hope in this life and the life to come. Even in the midst of exams and busyness, we must be careful not to forget the significance in what we are learning. Our Gospel story adds meaning to everything we do, but only if we remember to look for the ways in which God is teaching us to live more and more as He created us to. At the same time, we cannot forget that not all have this hope, and that we have been given it in order to share it with others. That true hope is the only way that restoration can come in Haiti, and in the broken systems in our own nations. And our job as students is first to believe and show others that life is indeed worth living…because of Christ.