Rick Bragg may well be the best story-teller in American writing today. His new work, primarily the story of his abusive alcoholic father's life, is called "The Prince of Frogtown."

It is terrific.

I loved Bragg's first major book - All Over but the Shoutin'- which was a tribute to his mother, who worked hard in the fields of Alabama in order to raise Rick and his two brothers. Their poverty, her noble character, and Bragg's ability to tell their story well was powerful.

After a number of years, he now has gone back to share the story of his father, a man he barely knew. Yet, remarkably, Bragg's father permeated every bit of the family's existence, in spite of AND because of his absence. And his abusiveness. One man's inner demons and struggles create ripples of effect through his battered wife, her family, and their sons. For generations. A remarkable and honest confronting of Bragg's own life and how it has been affected by his father's weaknesses.

Prince of Frogtown tells the history of his father's childhood and adult life in the deep squalor and poverty among millworkers and sharecroppers in Jacksonville, Alabama.

As always, Bragg captures the heart, the dignity, and the imperfections of the invisible poor in a unique and powerful way that leaves a lasting mark on you when you read it. Southerners call these folks "white trash." Bragg calls them his own.

I highly recommend it. Grade = A+
One of the best books I've read in the last 10 years.

Three times in the same week! I had to rub my eyes in disbelief. Bankruptcies keep piling up. On three separate occasions in the past week, bankruptcies became front of mind. Not financial bankruptcies but bankruptcies of hope. Real life situations where the hope reserves ran out and there was no FHIC (Federal Hope Insurance Commission) waiting to make good on the overdrafted account. Real life situations where a good person became confused into thinking that money really does make the world go around.

At lunch on Monday, a friend, David, shared that he was headed out of town for a cousin's funeral. The cousin had recently lost his job and primary source of income. As a result, he had lost custody of the foster children he and his wife were caring for. A few days later, the wife found the man in the garage, with the car running, in an apparent suicide. A permanent solution to a temporary problem. A bankruptcy of hope.

Early Wednesday morning, Freddie Mac's acting chief financial officer, David Kellerman, apparently ended his own life by hanging himself on an exercise machine in his basement in suburban Washington, D.C. As acting CFO, Kellerman surely found himself in a pressure cooker situation, managing a staff of about 500 and being ultimately responsible for the company's financial controls and reporting. Kellerman, 41, had been with Freddie Mac for over 16 years, and left behind a wife and young daughter. A bankruptcy of hope.

Finally, I learned of a friend, Keith, who had secured a second mortgage on his home to maintain the family's lifestyle in a struggling economy and a challenging business situation. The added debt only made matters worse, as did the fact that he failed to share the family's worsening predicament with his wife. On Friday, he succumbed to the pressure and walked out. He packed a few things, dropped the keys on the kitchen counter, and left the family with a note that he was headed to Alaska and would not be back. Bankruptcy of hope.

How do you get to a situation in your own mind where the BEST solution is suicide or abandoning the family altogether? Again, permanent solutions to temporary problems. And poor solutions at that.

How do you prevent filing for a bankruptcy of hope? How do you keep your spirits strong even when the stock market tanks or your business collapses? My years as a pastor, and my own life experiences, have taught me three things to do to prevent ever arriving at a moment that dark.

First, find your purpose in life. Most Americans define themselves by what they have or what they do. That is dangerous territory to inhabit. Your life is not defined by what you own, possess, or have. Nor is your life best defined by what you do for a living, whether lawyer, athlete, or auto mechanic.

A part of you craves meaning and purpose. Listen to that voice within your soul. Tune out the voices around you that insist you buy more, consume more, borrow more, and own more. The more you possess, the more you will worry about it. The more time you will invest in caring for your stuff, and the more energy you will spend in insuring it and maintaining it. Your life consists of far more than the possessions you pile up. Simplicity is your friend not your enemy.

Instead of finding stuff, find your purpose. The reason for your existence. Whether to serve others, to care for children, to alleviate suffering, or to generate wealthy in order to be a generous person, your life has some unique purpose that only you can fulfill. We clearly hunger to know that. Why else would Rick Warren's simple book, The Purpose-Driven Life, have sold more than 30MM copies?

By finding your purpose and beginning to live it out, you will gently steer your life away from material measures and into meaningful measures. You will ground your life in something that matters and lasts. Something that ultimately has meaning, and something that is deeper and richer than any economy, good or bad, can affect.

Second, invest in people rather than information. Relationships and community form the backbone of your life. Any study will tell you that having a network of friends improves the quality of your life and likely extends the length of your existence. Surround yourself with healthy friends and invest yourself in the community around you.

Your greatest enemy in a challenging time is the barrage of information that hits you at every turn. News outlets incessantly flood your senses. Pessimism is contagious and lethal. Turn off the news, put down the paper, end the continuous updates on your Blackberry. Replace the constant flow of bad news and despair with real-life interaction with other human beings. In particular, invest yourself in the people you care most about. By substituting relationships for information you will deepen the roots of your own life and increase your own satisfaction with existence. Your life will develop meaning and real hope instead of being based on the vicissitudes of the Dow Jones Industrial Average or the latest release from the Department of Homeland Security. That meaning and hope will stabilize you when tough times come.

Finally, when you need help, get it. Even a life with purpose, and a life rooted in a sense of belonging, family and community, will encounter occasional down moments and life challenges. Spouses will die, plans will fail, and other humans will hurt you. At those moments, draw on the resources around you. There simply are too many people nearby for you not to take advantage of the help they desire to provide. Gifted counselors, caring friends, mental health professionals, hopeful pastors. In every community, at least some of these persons are available to you. More importantly, they WANT to help you. Let them.

Bankruptcies of hope can be prevented. A recession simply reminds you to dig the well before you get thirsty.

For those who enjoy or would like to hear the remaining portions of my interview with Christopher Hitchens, author of "God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything," here it is.

As I have shared previously, I learned a lot from this interview. Mainly that I need to learn to ask questions better. He simply took off in his own direction with his own agenda - that should not have surprised me. But I managed it poorly and the twenty minutes got away before I really accomplished what I had hoped.

So, my responses to the key areas have already been posted. Here is the rest. Enjoy!

As promised, more of the Christopher Hitchens interview.

I had three primary areas I wanted to hear from Hitchens about. Two were posted earlier.

Two more posts today from my conversation with a leading anti-theist and author of "God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything."

First, I am always curious how atheists view the origin of the universe. Beyond evolution, matter had to come from somewhere. Either, matter was created by God, or it simply appeared out of nowhere. Physics can take us back to that point but cannot explain the original creative burst (bang). I see no other real options. Both require a step of faith to explain the beginning of the universe. Either matter appeared out of nothingness (Poof! It's magic), or a Creator, who always has been, created it (or spoke it into existence as Genesis and John suggest). Hitchens refuses to acknowledge that and says we simply don't know although we eventually may.



I am reminded of the old joke

Scientist approaches God a little cockily – “We’ve just cloned a sheep. That proves it.”
God: “Proves what?’
Scientist: “Proves that we can do everything these poor people on earth attribute to you.”
God: “Everything?”
Scientist: “Everything. Now we can even create life out of nothing. Look at this sheep. Test me – I can do it all.”
God: “Make a man.”
Scientist scoops up some dirt
God: “Wait a minute there, fellow. Get your own dirt.”

And that really is a point isn’t it?
The old philosopher was right – if you wanna make an apple pie truly from scratch, first you have to make the universe.

Second, my nemesis and friend, Erik, suggested I ask Hitchens about the recent ARIS results. American Religious Identification Survey. It showed that fewer Americans call themselves Christians as opposed to 20 years ago; however, those former Christians have not become atheists. They have largely become "Do it Yourselfers" when it comes to spirituality. They make it up for themselves. The number of self-declared atheists has remained largely constant over the years at between 1 and 2% of Americans. Why is that so? As we become increasingly secular and educated, does this not show that there is some inherent part of us humans that yearns (and indeed is created for) God and a higher purpose? Why are we not evolving to become more atheistic if there really is no God whatsoever.

I had a hard time getting Hitchens to understand the question - or perhaps he had no real answer.



Finally, much of our "interview" was his simply ignoring the question (or my phrasing it poorly), so later in the week, I will post his comments without commentary since he wandered off the areas I was most curious about.

Oseola McCarty, a poorly educated African-American laundry woman in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, gave more to charity in one gift than our Vice-President has given in his lifetime. Last week's release of the Bidens' tax returns reveals a troubling character weakness. Stinginess. Unrelenting shameless stinginess.

During the campaign, both Biden and Obama released their tax returns dating back to 2000. As far as I know, my radio show was the only media outlet to discuss all the candidates' returns for what they reveal about character and spirit. Generous people are happier than stingy people, more compassionate than stingy people, and more selfless than stingy people. Generosity matters. It reveals who you are.

As April 15 arrived this year, Obama and Biden released their tax returns for 2008. Two observations: Biden is stingy, and Obama only began giving when he knew the public would be watching.


First, consider Oseola McCarty, who lived a simple life in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, doing other people's laundry to eke out a living. She lived in a small home with no cable television, only getting air conditioning in the final three years of her life. Her Bible was taped together to keep all the books intact. She saved and gave $150,000 at age 87 to help poor kids go to the local college, the University of Southern Mississippi, since she had only been able to finish the 6th grade herself. She said she figured the kids trying to get an education needed the money more than she did. Generous giving gave her life purpose and joy.

On the other hand, consider Vice-President Joe Biden and his wife, Jill, who have given about 0.2% of their income to charity in each of the years between 2000 and 2008. Less than ½ of one percentage point given to persons in need, to ministries of their Catholic Church, to agencies that serve the poor and the hurting. In fact, this year they gave a total of $1885 to charity, marking the first time they had even given a sum larger than $1000 for the entire year. In every year of this decade, the Bidens' income has exceeded $200,000, and for the first time they gave away more than $1000 of their own money. Astonishing stinginess. Record-setting, in fact.

Their stinginess makes Barack and Michelle Obama appear generous. The Obamas gave away 6.5% of their considerable income ($2.6 MM) in 2008. They are showing progress. This percentage of giving (6.5%) marks their own personal best in the past decade. In fact, they gave less than 1% away in 2000, 2001, and 2002, only breaking into the paltry 1% category in 2003 and 2004, when he began to run for public office. Then, upon launching a bid for the presidency in 2005, their giving rose to 4.7%, and then 6.1% in 2006, and 5.8% in 2007.

So to the Obamas, here's a “Well done!” for continuing to increase their percentage given to charity; however, it is important to note that the Obamas now are only tied for last with President Reagan for the least generous presidents since 1969. Reagan and Obama are so far below the giving levels of Carter, Clinton, and both Bushes, that comparison is nearly impossible. The Reagans did grow forward in personal generosity in their second administration, so there is hope for the Obamas' growth in grace. People can and do change (although Biden appears reluctant to do so).

Sadly, one has to wonder why the Obamas' giving only began to reach any meaningful level once they began to run for public office. Was it because they knew it would now be scrutinized by the public eye?

Generous giving has changed my life. In fact, the happiest, most joyful people I encounter are also the most generous. There is a direct correlation. Stinginess makes miserable, critical people. Generosity breeds joy, selflessness, and grace. Jesus was right: Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. Your heart follows your money. Not vice-versa. Be generous and your heart will grow outward; be selfish with your money, and your heart will become increasingly Grinch-esque.

Even more remarkable, your level of income has nothing to do with it, but the percentage of income given does. Oseola McCarty is no exception; she is the rule. Poorer people actually give a higher percentage of their incomes to charity than wealthy persons. AND persons who give higher percentages of their incomes, regardless of their wealth level, report higher levels of life happiness and satisfaction. My own experience, in my twenty years as a pastor, confirms these studies. Joyful people are generous people. Stingy people are critical and selfish.

I could not help but notice the contrast this week. We now have the stingiest presidential team in the past forty years while a new American record for generosity appears to be being set. Over the past month, nine American colleges and universities, including the University of Southern Mississippi, have received anonymous gifts totaling over $45MM. Purdue University received the largest ($8MM), while UNC-Asheville, Penn State-Harrisburg, Norfolk State, and others all received gifts of more than $1MM.Many of these gifts are the largest ever received by these schools. A record-setting occurrence of generosity.

Even more amazing each school has no idea who made the gift. And they were required to sign statements binding them never to investigate who had generously supported them and invested in their scholarship funding. The giver(s) want to remain completely anonymous.

The contrast could not be more clear. Our President gives only when he knows others will be watching. And our Vice-President does not give at all. Meanwhile, a generous American, perhaps an individual or a group or a foundation, gives in abundance with a great desire not to be known. The focus is on the gift and the good done.

Jesus would be proud, I think. “So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.”

Clearly, Oseola McCarty and an anonymous American have something to teach Joe Biden, not to mention the rest of us.

Always good to share what people think of me and/or the show. So this one is from Daisy, who evidently listens to the show in spite of my asininity.

You sir are a pompous ass, with a much too large ego. So typical of those that use their "religiousness" for personal financial gain. You are akin to mega-church preachers, prosperity preachers, "christian" fund raisers and those that use their divinity credentials in an attempt to gain credibility in the promotion of themselves.

As I mentioned on the show on Sunday, I spoke with Christopher Hitchens (author of God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything) last week. I find Hitchens fascinating, partly for his intellectual capacities and partly for his dark, brooding, angry demeanor. So much so, that I actually bought his book about a year ago in hard copy. Paid full price for it too. Dang it - now they send me a free paperback edition of it!

Hitchens is an ardent anti-theist. He not only denies the existence of any God; he also blames religion, namely Christianity, for most of the evils that have ever happened in world history. An amazing position, and often one that is disingenuous at best, dishonest at worst. Dark, brooding and angry.

My goals for our conversation were simple. I was allotted 20 minutes, so I aimed to ask a few directed questions and get his honest reactions. As modest as my goal was, I still failed! I barely uttered a half-question before he took off with the answers he wanted to give. Still interesting and worth the effort but a bit disappointing nonetheless.

Two of his answers most merit discussion- if just for the astonishment they produce.

First, I asked him what he hopes for. As a person who does not experience hope through faith, God, resurrection, or eternity, what does one hope for?

Hitchens' answered surprised me - and depressed me.


In sum, Hitchens hopes for a day when all humans are completely free from any sense of concern about God, free to do whatever they choose however they choose. That strikes me as really odd. And not much to hope for. Feels a lot like hoping for anarchy. When we can do whatever we wish, what will that be? How will that be much different than how we live right now - at least in America? If that is all there is to hope for, then let's eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. Perhaps Hitchens should aim lower and just embrace hedonism.

Second, I am fascinated at how Hitchens can insist that religion is evil in every way, a deception that breeds sociopathic behavior. So I asked about the goods done by religion in history and how he reconciles his own convictions with the simple facts of the destructive power of atheistic regimes - e.g., the mass murders of Stalin (20MM), Mao (70MM), and Hitler (10MM). More than 100MM murdered in one century by atheistic regimes. Not to mention Lenin, Krushchev, Pol Pot, et al. And these atrocities were committed in peacetime and on their own fellow countrymen! The Crusades, the Inquisition, and witch burnings, in contrast, killed approximately 200,000 people (adjusted for population = 1 MM deaths today).

Hitchens tries to dodge the issue by claiming that communism is really a religion and cannot be categorized as atheistic. Are you kidding me? That is the whole of your response?


Finally, I do highly recommend his book. That is important to say - because I think it does stretch people of faith, like myself, to see things and hear things in new ways. And to engage with persons who differ from us. As I said, I bought the book long before I was asked to interview Hitchens, a man who benefitted from the Christian underpinnings and education of Britain and ironically is unable to see it. But a fascinating man nonetheless.

Few of us ever participate in a moment that truly changes history. I met Dutch van Kirk last week, and Dutch changed history. Dutch served as the navigator for the Enola Gay, the American B-29 bomber that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima. He shared his firsthand experience of the monumental event that precipitated the end of World War II and inaugurated the nuclear age.

Upon hearing Dutch's reflections on the events of August 6, 1945, my mind could not help but to go back, to a classroom at Emory University in 1989, where I was a young seminary student. I still remember well a lecture from one of my professors, chastising the United States for having dropped the bomb. The professor's sense of guilt and anger toward America filled the room. So, I must admit it was refreshing to hear last week a corrective in Dutch's careful, poignant remarks as he humbly chronicled the failed attempts at peace with Japan. He articulated the strategic, life-saving reasons why the atomic bomb became the best option to end a brutal war that could well have gone on for months, even years, more in Japan, China, and beyond.

Now, more than sixty years after the bomb, we have a President who seems to think that we can put the genie back in the bottle. President Obama last week spoke before 20,000 people in Prague, and shared his vision and hopes for a world free of nuclear weapons. He said, “I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” In essence, Obama made nuclear disarmament the centerpiece of his emerging foreign policy.

In almost incredible irony, at about the same time that Obama spoke, if one stood in Japan, one could have felt the breeze of North Korea's test missile as it soared overhead. If one snuck a peek into the inner workings of Iran, one would not have to look far to find the nuclear plans of a deranged leadership. And few of us doubt that Syria hides well its nascent plans for nuclear weaponry as well. While Al-Qaeda negotiates and connives to get its hands on such destructive power.

Surely, the President's speech on nuclear disarmament was meant as irony. Does Mr. Obama seriously intend to lead us back to the 1930's? A pre-nuclear age? No time machine can take us back to a time where nuclear weapons were unheard of, nor can any presidential administration.


Again, the genie is out of the bottle. It cannot be replaced safely within the confines of its previous residence but rather must be managed with realism and pragmatism. Once toothpaste has been squeezed from its tube, the act can no more be undone than nuclear know-how can somehow be removed from the brains and minds of moral leaders as well as those who would use such knowledge to destroy nations or perpetrate evil.

President Obama needs a real life and faith lesson in the moral nature of human beings. Each of us possesses the capacity for good. We are made in the image of God. We have it within us to do good, to grow, and to develop as moral beings. However, we also are fallen creatures, with a remarkable capacity to be selfish and to harm other people, i.e., to do evil. We are moral beings, and we can choose to help or to harm, to heal or to hurt. None of us is wholly good, and no nation or leader can be wholly good either.

No government, no leader, and no policy can alter human nature. No good governmental intentions can change the human soul. Only faith and the hand of God can do the work of making us new people. Some have accused Mr. Obama of naivete regarding a goal of nuclear disarmament. I would suggest, rather, that he fails to grasp the basics of human nature and our capacity to harm and to hurt.

The agenda should not be to eliminate nuclear weapons. To paraphrase a sagely bumper sticker, “When nuclear weapons are outlawed, only outlaws will have nuclear weapons.” To seek to eliminate nuclear weapons altogether would prove dangerous, and likely fatal, if not apocalyptic. Seeking to eliminate nuclear weapons does nothing to change the human capacity for good and evil and will likely result in the least good among us possessing what more moral regimes have rejected.

Rather, the agenda should be to manage well the knowledge the world already possesses. Disarmament is not management or leadership; it is suicide or abdication to outlaw regimes who will find a way to develop and arm themselves with nuclear capacity in clandestine ways. That is not paranoia, but rather is basic human nature. The genie is out. The 1930's have come and gone. Let's deal with reality. After all, one nuclear bomb can ruin your whole day.


Hard to believe – but Jesus may offer Mr. Obama and us sound wisdom on defense strategy. When Jesus sent out His disciples for the first time to go into towns He expected to be hostile to their preaching, He instructed them to “be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.” In other words, be shrewd but gentle at the same time. Jesus understood human nature. Not everyone will embrace peace; all nations and regimes will not stand arm in arm at any one point in time regardless of our highest hopes and ideals. That is human nature. And a good leader is prepared for both positive responses and negative ones. Shrewdness and pragmatism are eminently faith-oriented leadership tactics.

The proper response to humankind's capacity for both good and evil would not be cynicism or despair. Rather, a pragmatic and thorough system of defense prepares one for the worst. And, by the way, that same thorough defense system also allows one to continue to hope for the best. Without risking the chance of ruining one's whole day.

On Tuesday, I experienced "Bi-Polar Day."

On the show, we rarely do interviews. We get dozens of requests each week from authors and persons desiring to be on the show, but that is not what our show is really all about.

However, this week I decided to do interviews with Christopher Hitchens (prominent anti-theist and author of the best-selling God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything) and Max Lucado (well-known Christian pastor and author of dozens of books including his new one, His Name is Jesus). Talk about complete opposites! A real bi-polar experience.

I will share a few snippets of each interview as part of the show live this Sunday night. Next week, we will also post larger portions of the interviews here on the site for you to enjoy.

I have long appreciated Lucado for his masterful story-telling and creativity. His vantage point on real life and faith stimulates me regularly. He was gracious and warm, as is his wont. His new book is a coffee table style devotional re-telling of the life and experiences of Jesus.

In particular, my time with Hitchens was interesting. I was given only 20 minutes so I tried to ask some directed questions and let him respond. I was not particularly effective at keeping him on subject- in fact, I was terrible at it! Nevertheless, I appreciated the opportunity to engage with someone who sees things so radically differently from myself - especially during the days of Holy Week. I have read his book and found it to be angry and belligerent but also exceptionally thought-provoking and faith-stretching.

He and I do not agree on much, although there are some points we hold in common (like the threat of Islamic fascists whose views leave no room for anyone who disagrees). I find him to be intellectually sloppy, even partially dishonest, on many things, but he is a fascinating person and a provocative thinker. The conversation grew me forward.

I look forward to sharing some of Hitchens and Lucado with you on the show this weekend.

May your Holy Thursday be rich and blessed.

If you listen to the show, read my blogs, or know me, you know I care deeply about the kids at Murphy Harpst Children's Center. They have been treated like animals and objects. In fact, our bike ride on May 30 will help benefit them.

As a real life reminder of why this work matters so much, I share with you a letter I received today. It fits every dimension of Holy Week:

As I was showing some friends around campus the other day, I noticed our admissions director walking hand-in hand with a little boy. Being quite sure that he had been brought by his DFCS caseworker for an interview and a tour, I excused myself and walked over. “My name is Ms. Simmons,” I said. “Welcome to Murphy-Harpst.”

Gravely, he extended his hand, announcing, “My name is Amos. I have come to see if I can live here.”
“What do you think so far?” I asked.
He exclaimed, “Oh, it’s wonderful!” He raised his hands, middle and index fingers entwined. “I hope I can come here!”

By this time, my friends had joined us. When Amos raised those thin little hands with fingers crossed, their eyes filled with tears. “I hope you can come here, too,” I said. “I will look forward to seeing you again.”

Amos looked younger than our minimum age requirement, six years old. Normally, a child that young would be
referred to a foster home. I knew his “story” had to be unusually difficult if a referral to residential treatment was being considered. “What had this poor child been through?” I wondered.

When I returned to my office, I called Dr. Brian Parks, our VP and a psychologist. I asked him to tell me about Amos. Frankly, no matter how many stories I hear, I am never prepared for the next one.

Briefly, I was told that Amos had never known his father. His mother – a long-time drug addict – had been incarcerated so long that Amos could not even remember her name. The many men in and out of his mother’s “drug den” had abused baby Amos in every way imaginable. Not having learned to talk yet, he could not speak of the atrocities he had suffered.

When there are no words to channel feelings, there is only one way they can be expressed – through actions. Amos had kicked, hit, bitten, damaged, scratched and cursed his way through a multitude of foster homes until here he was, at a tiny age seven, crossing his fingers that we would accept him at this “haven on the hill.”

I knew Amos was at the right place a few days after his admission when Dr. Parks told me he had walked with Amos down to the barn so he could see the horses. “You have to be careful around horses,” said Amos, “because they will kick you if they have a chance.” When I saw the twinkle in Dr. Parks’ eyes, I knew he was excited about this gift of just the right “In” to begin our work with Amos.

The Amoses keep coming, dear friend, and the resources keep dwindling. Just Tuesday of this week I received word that payment for some of our services is to be cut 50-67 percent! For example, a therapy group in which Amos might find other children who have suffered as he has suffered, and learn that maybe it wasn’t his fault after all, will receive 67% less reimbursement than before. This impending reduction is yet another in a series of cuts sustained since July of 2007.

When we are tempted to say, “Enough already!” and stop taking care of these terribly abused and deprived children, we open our arms to yet another Amos.

I can’t think of a more appropriate time to share Amos’ story than this time of resurrection, both as we watch the dead earth around us come to life and as we rejoice in the resurrection of our Lord. Given the gifts of new life we enjoy now and are promised in the future, how can we not in turn give the gift of life to children whose hopes have been stomped into a dead ground?

Please join me in investing sacrificially to raise these little spirits just as the flowers around us spring to new life.

On their behalf,
Joanne Simmons, CEO