How Mark Anthony manipulates the crowd after the death of Julius Caesar Essay Example

How Mark Anthony manipulates the crowd after the death of Julius Caesar Paper Shakespeares play Julius Caesar is a play which elucidates many themes such as ambition, jealousy, tragedy, honour and integrity. It was written between the period 1597 and 1600 AD. The play is based upon actual events which took place in Rome over two millenniums ago. At the beginning of the play Shakespeare illustrates how Julius Caesar, following a successful campaign, returns to Rome and is offered the crown. He further explains that Cassius, a senior member of the senate, fearing for the republic, heads a conspiracy to murder Caesar. As the play continues, Cassius manages to invite many to aid his cause amongst whom was Brutus, a high-ranked member of the senate. The outcome of the conspiracy led to the death of Caesar in the capitol whilst the latter was totally unaware of the conspiracy. Following the death of Caesar, Brutus confronts the citizens of Rome and explains to them how his involvement in the conspiracy was for a pure and sincere intention and not to commit a cruel act of injustice. The aftermath of this speech was the consolation of the public and their total appreciation of this noble act. We will write a custom essay sample on How Mark Anthony manipulates the crowd after the death of Julius Caesar specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on How Mark Anthony manipulates the crowd after the death of Julius Caesar specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on How Mark Anthony manipulates the crowd after the death of Julius Caesar specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Concluding his speech, Brutus attempting to fully reassure the crowd, requested Mark Anthony to add a few words in appreciation of what he had just done. Anthony was a close companion of Caesar so his approval of the conspiracy would be very valuable in proving to the public the righteousness of the act. However Anthony, either for his own benefit or for justice, spoke against the conspiracy. This speech was highly effective and probably the turning point of the entire play. It was the reason for war and the reason for vengeance being taken. Anthonys powerful speech confines the true essence of politics and how orating influences are greater than any physical appliances or mannerisms to deter a people. During the following essay I shall attempt to analyse how Anthonys speech was influential and how he found it easier to appeal to emotion rather than reasoning to manipulate the citizens. Anthonys speech was a lot more subtle that that of Brutus. He uses more indirect methods to manipulate the crowd. He was able to read the mood of the audience whilst he was addressing them. He also paused three times during his speech, causing suspense, which consequently added to the drama that he wanted to create. In addition he even lied and pretended just so that he could gain the interests of his audience. Anthonys tone of speech varied as he spoke. This can be observed from the different attitudes portrayed in the manner in which he spoke. By varying his tone of voice, Anthony would be able to gain the interest of his audience, whereas if it were monotonous, the speech would sound boring. The opening few words of a speech are always important in drawing the attention of the audience. Anthony addresses the citizens as Friends, Romans, countrymen (Act 3: Scene 2) in contrast to Brutus who addressed them as Romans, countrymen and lovers. This variance, although slight, shows a major contrast in the attitudes of Brutus and Anthony. Brutus clearly demonstrates that his love for Rome is greater than any affection of an individual or close relation. Even in his statement Not that I lovd Caser less but that I lovd Rome more. (Act 3: Scene 2) it is evident of his keenness in the development of Rome over any prejudice feeling which would oppose a peaceful and blissful future in Rome. On the contrary, Mark Anthony firstly appeals to those who have close relationship with him and then mentions the Romans and countrymen who are insignificant in comparison to those whom are loved and revered. This is a clause leading to his true intention to establish that emotions and intimacy should be considered before the betterment of the state. So Anthony, in reality, is trying to appeal to the emotions of the crowd rather than, like Brutus, appeal to the love of the crowd for Rome and their home. Immediately after receiving the attention of the crowd, Anthony, carefully considering the mood of the audience, claims I come to bury Caesar not to praise him (Act 3: Scene 2). The public, after listening to Brutus, were fully reassured by the virtue of Caesars death. Furthermore the crowd, as one plebeian confirmed, felt that speaking ill of Brutus would be inappropriate and would initiate the audiences wrath and displeasure. Anthony understood this and therefore decided to take a more subtle approach in degrading Brutus and his conspiracy. As the speech progresses Anthony repetitively mentions the nobility and honour of Brutus and those that assisted him in the murder of Caesar. However Anthonys true intent was not to dignify Brutus and the other conspirators, rather to debase them. Anthony does this by making honour appear as a deterrent to seeing the good actions of an individual. He mentions honour alongside the killing of a man who brought many captives home, hath wept and thrice refused the crown. This technique that Anthony used was very effective as can be observed from the proclamation of one of the plebeians that They were traitors: honourable men? Then, after mentioning the virtues of Caesar, Anthony condemns the belief of anybody who said that Caesar was ambitious because Ambition should be made of sterner stuff (Act 3: Scene 2). Also the rhetorical question was this ambition? is very effective because Caesars greatness was just mentioned and by seeing Caesar in a bias way, as Anthony portrayed him, it becomes obvious that Caesar would not be ambitious. Thereafter appealing again to the sympathy of the crowd Anthony states Bear with me, my heart is in the coffin there with Caesar, and I must pause till it come back to me. By saying this Anthony demonstrates to the crowd how he was greatly moved by Caesars demise. The audience would obviously think highly of Anthony because, unlike Brutus, Anthony has feelings which are for him unbearable to suppress. The crowds appreciation of this quality of Anthony can be further observed by a plebeians claim that Poor soul, his eyes are red as fire with weeping (Act 3: Scene 2). In addition some of the assertions made by the plebeians indicate their approval of what he had to say, for instance one of them said Methinks he has much reasoning in his saying (Act 3: Scene 2). Later Anthony turns the speech onto a fabricated will. This will was a deceitful lie which the crowd were instantly attracted to and eager to hear their share. This lie demonstrates how fickle the crowd are because they are now more willing to believe in Anthonys integrity. They did not pause to reflect whether the will is genuine or not as this may lead to doubts which will consequently lead to the will not being read out and therefore no one being the recipient of the seventy five drachmas promised. At first, Anthony does not read to them the will even after the constant pleas of the crowd. This is indicative of the fact that he only fabricated the will as bait because he wanted to hold them in suspense and keep them enthralled in whatever he had to say. He asks the crowd Will you be patient? Will you stay awhile? He does this in order to calm the crowd so that he could gain their attention. Furthermore Anthony remarks I fear I wrong the honourable men whose dagger have stabbed Caesar: I do fear it Anthony pretends to feel guilty. This makes the crowd trust him more because they feel that he is innocence and is speaking for justice and not for power. Shortly afterwards Anthony explains why he doesnt read the will straightaway. He says You are not wood, you are not stone but men: and being men hearing the will of Caesar, it will inflame you. Here Anthony, very cleverly, flatters the crowd. The reason why these words are so effective is because of its contradiction to those words of Marullus, who at the beginning of the play addressed the citizens as You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things (Act 1: Scene 1), referring to their fickleness and stupidity. By saying this, Anthony gains the trust and affection of his audience. With Caesars body at his side, Anthony affectionately explains to the crowd You all do know this mantle, I remember the first time ever Caesar put it on, twas on a summers evening in his tent. (Act 3: Scene 2) By saying this again Anthony would seem like a very sensitive and caring man, which everybody adores. Another notable way in which Anthony gets the trust of the audience is by showing that he knew the most intricate details of the incident. He says Look in this place ran Cassius dagger through: see what a rent the envious Casca made: through this the well beloved Brutus stabbed. By pretending he knows the order in which Caesar was stabbed, Anthony would be confident that he has the trust of his audience because the crowd would think that he knows all the facts and thus is in a better position to make a judgement. Furthermore Anthony refers to Brutus as being beloved and Caesars angel, which would make the audience feel great animosity towards Brutus, who although so dear to Caesar, betrayed him. From this, it can be understood clearly that Anthony is appealing to the emotions of the citizens and not logical reasoning to rebel against the conspirators. To show his innocence and his pure intention to stand for justice, Anthony claims I am no orator as Brutus is; but a plain blunt man I have neither writ nor words, nor worth, action, nor utterance, nor the power of speech, to stir mens blood. (Act 3: Scene ) Judging from this, the crowd may have deduced that Anthony is more reliable than Brutus because his speech was directly from the heart and not because he had the power of speech as did Brutus. He would also appear as an innocent man who wishes nothing except justice to prevail. Moreover the citizens would feel as though Anthony is not a member of the senate, nor involved in politics but one of them. This gives them an added sense of empathy towards Anthony, because if he is accepted as one of them, they would think of him as a friend who just wants sympathy rather than a senior member of the senate who would need to be treated with respect and honour. Concluding his mutiny against Brutus and the others who conspired against Caesar, Anthony says And bid them speak to me: but were I Brutus, and Brutus Anthony, there were an Anthony would ruffle up your spirits, and put a tongue in every wound of Caesar, that should move the stones of Rome, to rise and mutiny. (Act 3: Scene 2). By saying this, Anthony is able to give the crowd a final hint of encouragement to rise and mutiny. Unlike the way he began his speech, by glorify the conspirators; he ends it by mentioning their wickedness and evilness. He tells them that if he had the consciousness of Brutus, he would curse Caesar only for power, due to lustful greed and passion. Again Anthonys innocence would be authenticated because he compares himself to the wickedness of Marcus Brutus. The people of Rome were extremely fickle and easily manipulated. They did not understand the world of politics and how much power they held as citizens of Rome. However there were members of the senate who had great political acumen. They possessed superb understanding of politics. They could very easily influence and change the hearts of an entire nation. Although Mark Anthony was not considered as one of them, after the death of Caesar, Anthonys insight in the field of politics was recognised. He managed to, very cleverly, manipulate the crowd into believing that the murder of Caesar was an immoral act of injustice and the conspirators only acted out of jealousy and envy for Caesars power. Mark Anthonys speech highlights the fickleness of human beings and how they are easily swayed by the eloquence of speech. The techniques used by Mark Anthony are still being displayed today by contemporary politicians. These techniques are highly effective as Shakespeare shows in Julius Caesar.

A Complete Guide to Parentheses and Brackets

A Complete Guide to Parentheses and Brackets A Complete Guide to Parentheses and Brackets A Complete Guide to Parentheses and Brackets By Mark Nichol This post discusses the functions of parentheses and brackets, which are used to set off portions of text from the whole for various purposes. Parentheses, almost exclusively appearing in pairs, are usually employed in the same manner as a pair of commas or dashes, though they suggest de-emphasis of the content within (as opposed to commas, which convey a neutral insertion of information, and dashes, which highlight the text between them). Parentheses, in addition to being employed to interject examples or a brief digression, enclose an abbreviation, acronym, or initialism or a translation, or a numerical equivalent of a spelled-out number. They also set off a cross-reference, as in â€Å"For more details, read the associated case study (pages 113–119)† or â€Å"Gene therapy is discussed briefly here. (See chapter 12 for more information.)† Parentheses may frame a plural ending to indicate that a word can be read as either singular or plural, as in â€Å"Enter the title(s) of the document(s) on the asset list,† or to allow for a gender-neutral reading, as in â€Å"Next, (s)he should consult with an adviser.† Note that one of a pair of parentheses is called a parenthesis. This term also pertains in general to setting text off from other text regardless of which punctuation signals the separation. (Two or more instances of parenthesis might be referred to as parentheses.) Text that is set off by complementary punctuation marks is sometimes (including often in posts on this site) referred to as a parenthetical phrase, or simply a parenthetical. A single close parenthesis is sometimes used in place of a period when enumerating, as in â€Å"The three types of rock are 1) igneous, 2) metamorphic, and 3) sedimentary.† (An open parenthesis is not used in isolation.) A few more guidelines about parentheses follow: Parentheses should not be used in immediate proximity to each other or within another set of parentheses; in the latter case, use brackets instead (or commas or dashes). Avoid including more than one sentence, or including an extensive sentence, within parentheses. Avoid situating a complete sentence in parentheses within another sentence. Avoid using parentheses too frequently. Consider employing commas or dashes instead, or otherwise revising text so that parentheses do not appear repeatedly in one piece of content. Parentheses framing text in italics, boldface, or another style treatment differing from the default text should not share that formatting, but should rather be in the the same type as the surrounding text. A complete sentence within parentheses should end with a period or other terminal punctuation before the close parenthesis, and the preceding text should be followed by terminal punctuation: â€Å". . . then it is fair game. (There are always exceptions, of course.)† If text enclosed in parentheses does not comprise a complete sentence and ends a framing sentence, the terminal punctuation of the framing sentence should immediately follow the close parenthesis. â€Å". . . then it is fair game (with exceptions).† Text in parentheses in the midst of a sentence is not punctuated, regardless of whether it is a complete sentence (unless the terminal punctuation is a question mark or an exclamation point), and the first word of a complete sentence in parentheses is not capitalized: â€Å". . . then (there are always exceptions, of course) it is fair game.† â€Å". . . then (with exceptions) it is fair game.† Bracket, in American English, refers to square brackets. (In British English, the term pertains to round brackets, or what in American English are called parentheses.) Brackets have limited uses, including adding contextual information within quoted material â€Å"She spoke to [Smith],† where the bracketed text replaces one or more spoken words to provide clarity (in this example, replacing the vague him) or to add a word or phrase omitted in the spoken or written quotation. Sometimes, the replaced word or phrase is retained, as in â€Å"She spoke to him [Smith],† but this unnecessary. when framing the word sic (â€Å"thus†), borrowed from Latin, confirming that in quoted material, an error or confusing wording is faithfully reproduced from the original text and not a transcription error, as in â€Å"The comment read, ‘You are definately [sic] out of your mind.’† (Note that sic is italicized, but the brackets are not.) parenthesizing within parentheses, as in â€Å"Submit form 13F (Petition for Appeal [formerly titled Petition for Grievance]) within thirty days.† (When possible, revise sentences to avoid this type of construction.) clarifying, in formal writing, that the first letter of quoted material is, the source material, in a different case, as in â€Å"[A]s you would have others do unto you† is the gist of the admonition,† where the quoted material is the second half of the original statement and, thus, as is lowercase in the source text. framing ellipses to indicate that a word or phrase has been omitted, although generally, the ellipses on their own are sufficient. modifying a quotation, perhaps for grammatical agreement, when partially paraphrasing, as when â€Å"I agree with his account of the incident, as improbable as it sounds,† is reported, â€Å"He said that he ‘agrees[s] with his account of the incident, as improbable as it sounds.’† Parentheses and brackets both have distinct functions in computing, linguistics, math, and science contexts that are not described here. In addition, similar symbols include curly brackets {/} and angle brackets , which have specialized uses not discussed in this post. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Punctuation category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:When to Capitalize Animal and Plant Names50 Synonyms for â€Å"Idea†Preposition Mistakes #1: Accused and Excited

Smallpox and its History as a Bio-Weapon Research Paper

Smallpox and its History as a Bio-Weapon - Research Paper Example The primary method of spreading was through air vapor, meaning the disease was passed quickly among family members and individuals living or working in close proximity to one another. In addition the scabs that were formed as part of the disease were highly infectious, and clothing or bedding used by an individual with the disease was able to pass on the disease to another. The ability of the virus to survive in bedding and clothing provided the inspiration for use of the virus as a biological weapon (PubMed Health 2011). There is no direct treatment against the disease. When the virus was first prominent vaccination was an unknown technique. Instead, inoculation was used, which involved inserting the virus itself into the individuals being inoculated. The virus is much more virulent that what is used for vaccination, and it could cause sickness for many weeks in individuals inoculated (Adams, Adams and Shuffelton 1876). Vaccination was developed against the disease later on which helped individuals to create antibodies for the virus, protecting them against infection. Vaccination involves the injection of a lower virulence, homologous virus, which allows the body to raise antibodies against the virus without the large negative effects that inoculation has (PubMed Health 2011). . There are two forms of smallpox. Variola major is the more serious form and is life threatening in people who are not vaccinated. Variola minor is a milder form of infection that causes illness but rarely death. When the viru s first appeared, these strains could not be separated based on clinical form except during outbreaks, now they are able to be identified using virological identification .The virus was considered eradicated as a consequence of a program by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1970 . There are a large number of symptoms connected to smallpox including, excessive bleeding, fever, vomiting, severe headache, delirium and fatigue. One of the most noticeable symptoms is the appearance of a raised pink rash, which turns into sores that then become crusty over time. These sores or scabs are able to pass on the infection and the disease is infectious in an individual until the scabs fall off. While the virus has been eradicated from the general population, samples of it remain in laboratories that are used for government research . The virus caused a large number of deaths worldwide, and there are fears that the remaining samples may be taken advantage of as a bio-weapon, such as in a ter rorism attack. Effects if Released There are a number of organisms that could be used in biological warfare that causes widespread death and disease. Smallpox is one of the most serious of these. When the virus was prevalent, the death rate was 30%, and even now there is no specific therapy for infection . If exposure is known, then the vaccine can be given up to four days after exposure. This can prevent the disease or reduce the severity. However, once it has become symptomatic, there are no direct treatments available . Antibiotics are sometimes used to relieve secondary infections that are sometimes associated with the disease, but these have no effect on the progression of the disease itself . The smallpox virus caused widespread death and disease for a significant period of time, throughout the discovery of the New World and the American Revolution in particular. While inoculation was available, there were no treatments against the virus, and those infected were often isolated or killed to prevent the infection from being

Unit 4 Discussion Board Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 2

Unit 4 Discussion Board - Essay Example Mount Sinai NYU Health is an example of a healthcare organization – a holding company – that has a multi-corporate entity. The health organization has several subsidiaries or healthcare divisions serving the greater New York City area. The hospital is listed in the book, Jonas and Kovner’s Health Care Delivery in the United States (2002), as a conglomerate with subsidiaries in ambulatory care, hospitals, and employed and affiliated physician groups. Other subsidiary-companies provide traditional home health services for Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, and self-payers and other services not covered by federal programs. The organization is centralized, as mission, plans, and CEO financial and acquisition powers are reserved as the parent company’s while local units have separate boards with their strategic authority being limited. (Kovner & Jonas 2002, p. 163). The advantages of a multi-corporate structure in the administration of a healthcare organization such as Mount Sinai NYU Health could be seen in two main areas: profitability and quality of service. In terms of profitability, the multi-corporate structure offers an increase in volume, cost savings, and greater leverage in bargaining with managed care organizations. When it comes to the quality of service, a multi-corporate healthcare organization is said to have improved quality of care that results from standardization and specialized expertise. (p. 164) Another important and obvious aspect about multiple-corporate structure is that it allows for greater flexibility in operations because each division or agency within the whole healthcare organization may assume its own separate legal entity. Therefore, as more services are provided or more subsidiaries are added, the other subsidiaries are less likely to be disturbed. There are critics who argue

Federal Contracts Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Federal Contracts - Essay Example This move is extremely essential for small entrepreneurs to expand their businesses. This paper analyzes the federal act support for small businesspersons with the aim of expanding their businesses. It further provides an organizational chart that supports working with the federal contracting system. Federal Contracts under a given Business Development Program Federal government only provides support to businesspersons or prime contractors that are performing at least one active EPA contract. In addition, they must also be eligible for the award of federal contracts. The other parties who are bound to receive assistance are companies whose corporate policy is to promote, develop and implement subcontracting opportunities for the sector of socioeconomic. In order to help such small businesses that are still starting, but have a viable idea; the SBA came up with the 8(a) Business Development Program. What is the 8(a) Business Development Program? Business Development Program is assista nce program for small-disadvantaged businesspersons with bigger ideas. This program also offers a broad scope of assistance to firms under people who are economically disadvantaged. ... Business Development Program Benefits The Business Development Program assists inspiring entrepreneurs greatly since participants being able to receive sole-source contracts of roughly $4 million for goods and services. Concerning manufacturing, the participants receive a total of $6.5 million, which is to assist in establishment and expansion of already existing business. Additionally, as much as this program helps, 8(a) still assists in building of competitive advantage. This program also helps in the improvement of institutional expertise by assisting participants to take part in competitive acquisitions (Ralph & John, 1995). Firms under 8(a) program are capable of forming joint ventures that assist them in teaming up to bid contracts. This process enhances the ability of most firms to perform larger prime contracts and overcome the effects of contract bundling. It is also possible for such companies to combine and form one large contract as highlighted in the Mentor Protege Progr am. There are usually the requirements and the objectives of the 8(a) Business Development Program, which involves graduation of firms to higher notch of competitive advantage. This process assures organizations of thriving in competitive business environment. The goal of this program is to help firms maintain balance between their commercial and government businesses. As stipulated in the NAICS code, it also provides the limit on the amount of dollar value of sole-source contracts that individual participant is likely to receive while taking part in the program, which is roughly $100 million. The requirements include the following: a) Systematic evaluations b) Yearly reviews c) Business planning

What It Means To Be Human Religion Essay

What It Means To Be Human Religion Essay [1st]First of all, I would like to emphasize the theological and academic depth of Dr Mark Elliotts paper. I would also like to acknowledge the initiative of the Ecumenical Institute at Bossey (especially of its director, Professor Fr Ioan Sauca) in organizing this dialogue between Evangelicals and Orthodox which enables members of each tradition from different national contexts to meet and explore areas of convergence on major Christian themes. Such discussion between the two different traditions might bring to light common points of doctrine and bring them closer to one another. The Orthodox need to draw nearer to the Evangelicals, and the Evangelicals need to see the Orthodox world with more confidence. The time has already come for us to be no longer divided. [bod]The theme of this years seminar, What it means to be Human, will enable Orthodox and Evangelicals to explore, compare and contrast their understandings of what it means to be human (theological anthropology), and to reflect on how the extent of convergence in this area might bring us closer together theologically and facilitate our joint practical action. [hed]Convergence and Divergence [hed1]1. The four distinctive characteristics [1st]In the first part of his paper, Dr Elliott outlines present day Evangelicalism both from a historical and a doctrinal perspective. I have noted the four distinctive characteristics of Evangelicalism those of conversionism, Biblicism, crucicentrism and activism, to which the Evangelical Alliance has added that of Christocentrism, for [as Dr Elliott says] it is hard to imagine any Christian movement or denomination that would not call itself Christocentric. [bod]The first four characteristics are also found in the Orthodox doctrinal framework in a more or less nuanced form. However, the Orthodox might have some problems with the fifth element Christocentrism in the sense in which the author has mentioned it. The author writes, I I think Evangelicals do have a particular way of understanding the incarnation as being less about the assumption of humanity than as the activity of the God-man individual, who is more a substitute than a representative. For the Orthodox, Jesus Christ, through his incarnation, has assumed our humanity in his divine hypostasis. In Jesus Christ our human nature has received its real existence, not as being its own centre but in a pre-existent centre, namely in the unity of the divine hypostasis of the Logos. Through his incarnation the hypostasis of the divine Logos did not unite with another human hypostasis; rather, he assumed human nature in his eternal divine hypostasis, becoming, by means of this event, the hypostasis of our own human nature. Hence, through his incarnation, Jesus Christ as Son of God became united in a supreme manner with our humanity. In other words, he came into the closest possible proximity with us. This process is a consequence of the hypostatic union. That is why he is called God-Man. [bod]From this point of view, our humanity has been healed from all the effects and consequences of the original sin by Jesuss sacrifice and resurrection. It is important to emphasize in this context that the sacrifice of Jesus was directed not only towards his Father but also towards his own human nature and, implicitly, towards us human beings. Through his sacrifice offered to God, Jesus Christ is made perfect as a human being, sanctifying or perfecting other human beings through this. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews writes clearly on this matter: and having been made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him (Heb. 5:9). Or For if the blood of goats and bulls, with the sprinkling of the ashes of a heifer, sanctifies those who have been defiled so that their flesh is purified, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to worship the living God! (Heb. 9:13-14). The same author says further: it is by Gods will that we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified (Heb. 10:10,14). Christ has become through his cross and resurrection the first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep (1 Cor. 15:20). Therefore, he is not a substitute for humankind, but the one who fully assumed and fulfilled it. From this perspective, we as human beings do not remain external to the incarnation, but are truly present in it. [hed1]2. Atonement: one of the three issues in Evangelical theological anthropology [1st]For the Orthodox, Christs sacrifice and his death on the cross are not understood as penal substitutionary atonement. From this point of view, statements like sin incurs divine wrath and judgmentà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬ ¦ and on the cross, Jesus sacrificially atoned for sin by dying in our place and paying the price of such sin are problematic for our soteriological doctrine. [bod]The Orthodox understand Jesuss death on the cross as being more a healing of the human nature disfigured by sin, and not as a price that Jesus had to pay in our place in order to satisfy God, whose honour is offended by our sin. In view of the fact that we have been created as an overflow of Gods love, our sin has caused him more sadness than offence. The concept of a substitutionary sacrifice by means of which the offended honour of God was re-established, has more to do with a so-called juridical act (sin-punishment-redemption) than with one which would express the divine love or sympathy. In this respect, the Orthodox might also have a problem with the concept of inherited guilt. Although Paul seems to be quite clear in this respect Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned (Rom. 5:12) I think this may cause difficulties for the Orthodox. In my own opinion, Paul is talking in th is context about the consequences of sin rather than inherited guilt resulting from Adams sin. According to the theology of the church fathers, we consider the cross as the way to resurrection. From this point of view, Orthodox theology is more resurrectional than Evangelicalism, although this does not mean that the Orthodox put less emphasis on the sacrifice of Christ than on his resurrection. In Orthodox worship, the veneration of the cross is not separated from the praise of the resurrection. This is wonderfully illustrated in a liturgical hymn: We worship your Cross, Jesus Christ, and your holy Resurrection we praise and honour. When considering the difference between a Calvinian and a Grotian understanding of the cross, the Orthodox may ask, are the Evangelicals more Calvinian or Grotian? Dr Elliott points out that Calvin sees God as being pleased because his Son as man obeyed him. For Grotius, God is above any such sense of being offended. The anthropological premise is that humans are taken seriously by God, but what does this mean? From this point of view, the Orthodox are closer to the doctrinal position of Grotius than to that of Calvin. My question is further justified by the following point made by Dr Elliott: To be honest, those who espouse a view that God the Father did not send his Son to the cross with a view to his bearing a penalty are arguably those who see the cross as one doctrine among others, and perhaps are not crucicentric enough to be traditionally Evangelical. [hed1]3. The Authority and Power of the Bible and The Uniqueness and Universality of Christ two theological issues highlighted by the Lausanne Covenant, 1974 [1st]The concept of mission, based on the authority and power of the Bible and the uniqueness and universality of Christ, may be a point of convergence between the two traditions. Nevertheless, there is a tendency for the Orthodox to put more emphasis on the liturgical reading of the Bible than on the teaching and preaching of it. As Professor John Breck has said, [shortquote]à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ however important the place of the Bible may be in both personal and liturgical usage, for many Orthodox that place is purely formal. They respect and venerate the Scriptures, they recognize many familiar passages, particularly from the Sunday Gospel readings, and they insist that theirs is a biblical Church. Nevertheless, only a small minority seeks daily nourishment from Bible reading. à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ we Orthodox have all too often neglected or even abandoned our patristic heritage which placed primary emphasis on the preaching of Gods Word. [1st]In this sense, the frequently made comment that the Orthodox kiss the Bible and dont read it is not entirely unjustified. [hed1]4. The true image of God [1st]The idea that human beings are created by and in Christ as the true image of God (Heb. 1:1-4) with the hope of a blessed and immortal life is a point of convergence between our traditions. Yet church fathers do not speak only of the image of God, but also and to an equal extent of the resemblance (likeness) to God. In this sense St John of Damascus says, the phrase according to the image means the reason and freedom, whereas according to the resemblance means likenessà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. He continues, the image is developed into likeness through the practice of virtues. Therefore, the image of God is something which is given to us and the resemblance is something that we have to achieve. It is only in this sense that we might accept what Paul Evdokimov said: An image without resemblance is one reduced to passivity. But even in a passive state, the realization that we are made in the image of God remains eikona tou Theou. This reality is beautifully expressed in the words of th e Orthodox funeral service: I am the image of your ineffable glory, though I bear the marks of my transgressions. [bod]Since the man is created not only from dust but also through Gods breath of life it becomes obvious that he has a special relationship with the nature from which he is formed, and also with God his Creator. As St Gregory of Nazianzus affirms, Since from dust I have been created, I belong to the earthly life; but being also a small divine part, I also carry in my life the desire for eternal life. Therefore, because he is made in the image of God, man is rooted and anchored in eternity. But being the image of God refers not only to the soul but also to the body. St Gregory Palamas sees the image as relating to the whole human being: The name man does not refer to the soul or the body in a separate way, but to both at the same time because they were created together according to the image of God. [hed1]5. The weakness of the will and the grace of God [1st]We as Orthodox fully agree that after Adams sin, human will remained very weak. But in spite of this fact, human beings still have the freedom to choose for God. This was specially emphasized by the Patriarch Jeremias during a dialogue with the Lutherans around 1580, as Dr Elliott comments: humans preserved the ability to choose for God freedom as the possibility of choice. According to the Orthodox perspective, grace does not force or limit the human will and its freedom. That is, grace does not work in or for human beings in an irresistible way, forcing them to receive grace in order to be saved without their collaboration. The reason why not all human beings are saved is not because this is predestined by God, with some people being saved and others being lost, but, rather, because of a lack of response by some people to grace. The grace of God does not force anyone to pursue actions independently of their will. That is why the Orthodox refuse to accept the concept of absolu te predestination. [bod]Nowadays, we hear more and more voices among Orthodox in favour of a relative predestination, in the sense that God desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:4). This relative predestination is shown in Gods will for every human being to be saved. This understanding of predestination sees it as conditioned by Gods foreknowledge of peoples collaboration or otherwise with divine grace: those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son (Rom. 8:29). If God predestined the salvation of only some human beings, that would contradict his eternal love as manifested in the incarnation and the cross of his Son, and also the ontological-universal value of the Christs sacrifice on the cross. From this point of view, Elliotts comment that for the sixteenth-century Lutherans in dialogue the point of salvation was to have ones independent centre of decision-making removed, to be replaced with total dependence on God sounds quite strange to the Orthodox. [hed1]6. Sanctification and justification [1st]Are we wholly sanctified when we are justified? And when does this process happen? At conversion or at baptism? From Dr Elliotts paper we may conclude that there is a lack of consensus among the Evangelicals in this respect. Is human sinful nature totally destroyed? Are the roots of pride, self-will, anger and love of the world totally removed from the heart, as John Wesley claimed? These are questions that need to be addressed. [bod]From an Orthodox perspective, conversion is the simple act of affirmation of a decision with regard to justification. The process of becoming holy begins with the sacrament of baptism. However, the fulfilment of holiness is obtained only at the end of a constant battle with sin and the continual practice of virtue. From this point of view, the Orthodox see two stages towards true holiness: sacramental holiness, obtained temporarily through baptism, and moral holiness, understood as a final stage to be reached. In this final stage, holiness corresponds to a stage which in patristic tradition and spirituality is called theosis. We will return to this issue again at the end of this paper. The Orthodox perspective on the sinful nature of human beings affirms that after the fall, the image of God was not totally lost and human knowledge was not entirely reduced to a dark and opaque understanding of the world. Human beings can partially penetrate this opacity by means of another way of knowing, namely that which arises from virtue. The marring of the image of God (darkening of reason, corruption of the heart, weakening of the will) in human beings does not mean its destruction or abolition, for none of the human spiritual functions were completely destroyed through original sin. Original sin has only obscured the image of God in human beings, not destroyed it. The tendency and the capacity of human beings to know and to want to do what is good have also survived the fall, but obviously in a weakened state. Fallen human beings are also able to achieve virtue and overcome temptation if you do what is right (cf. Gen. 4:7); fallen human beings can reject death, choosing lif e See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, death and adversity à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Choose life, so that you and your descendants may live (Deut. 30:15,19). Therefore Orthodox do not see human beings as totally fallen, nor the image of God in humanity as totally destroyed. [hed1]7. The anthropology of revivalism [1st]I do not know to what extent Evangelicals accept the ideas of Charles Finney, presented in Dr Elliotts paper and summarized below. But some of these could, with certain qualifications, be shared by the Orthodox. For instance: [list]- Preach the reality of hell, not of sin. Being filled by the Spirit is vital since, in the spiritual battle, attack is the best form of defence. One must give the heart to God and submit to him. Repentance is a change of mind, as regards God and towards sin. It is not only a change of view, but a change of the ultimate preference or choice of the soul. It is a voluntary change and by consequence involves a change of feeling and of action toward God and toward sin. These words may be accepted by the Orthodox as being a clear definition of the meaning of repentance. Humans have responsibility to repent and believers should not pray that God would help them to do that, for the sinner has to provide the will and disposition. However, these words leave no space for synergism, understood as cooperation between God and human beings concerning the process of their renewal. [1st]The Pauline statement in 2 Corinthians 4:16 is very important in relation to the process of human renewal. So we do not lose heart. Even though our outer nature is perishing, our inner nature is being renewed day by day. According to the Orthodox, our salvation includes: [list]a passage from death to life, from darkness to light (John 3:1-6; Col. 1:13-14), through repentance, faith and baptism I have been saved. a process of spiritual growth and maturation (2 Pet. 1:2-8) through ongoing repentance, faith and communion, often called deification I am being saved. Paul writes of our inner life being renewed day by day. a promise of eternal life (2 Cor. 5:9-11; John 14:1-6), calling us to perseverance and righteousness I shall be saved. [hed1]8. The relation between soul and body [1st]What is the soul? Answers such as the body is the image of God by association with the soul and soul and body are aspects of the human existence, quoted by Dr Elliott, may be seen as convergence points between the anthropologies of our two traditions. Therefore, the human beings uniqueness consists in the close relation between spirit and soma. Salvation is for the whole human being soma and soul. Similarly, the final act of universal judgment applies to the whole human being. Our anthropology is therefore understood only through the eschatological event. That is why the body will be raised again in order to be judged by the Creator, together with the soul with which it has formed a unity during its earthly life. From this point of view, the death of the body does not mean its destruction, but the passageway towards a new existence. [bod]In view of the fact that Paul says your life is hidden with Christ in God (Col. 3:3), we may conclude that our humanity is a great mystery. Some of the Evangelicals appear to disagree with this. [hed1]9. Deification (Theosis) [1st]Dr Elliott argues that Evangelicals may have problems with deification. Why should this be so? If we understand deification in the sense in which R. J. Bauckham and other theologians apparently did, as quoted in the paper, namely that humans become divine as God is divine, such a thought is obviously unthinkable for any Christian theologian, Evangelical or Orthodox. From an Orthodox point of view, deification is more than being in the image of God or being adopted as Gods children. Being renewed by Gods grace, we become partakers of the divine nature: Thus he has given us, through these things, his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of lust, and may become participants in the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4). This does not mean that we become divine by nature. If we participated in Gods essence or nature, the distinction between God and humans would be abolished. What this means is that we participate in Gods divine grace, described in scripture in a number of ways, such as glory, love, virtue and power. We are to become like God by his grace, and truly his adopted children, but we never become God by nature. For we are human, always have been human, and always will be human. We cannot take on the nature of God. [bod]Divinization, in the definitive form which the fathers gave it, looks towards a single goal. That is the goal of assuring man that the quest for the authentic person (not as a mask or as a tragic figure) is not mythical or nostalgic but a historical reality. Jesus Christ does not justify the title of Saviour because he brings the world a sublimely beautiful revelation of personhood, but because he realizes in history the very reality of the person and makes it the basis and hypostasis of the person for every man. According to some church fathers, this transformation occurs especially through the eucharist, for when Christs body and blood become one with ours, we become Christ-bearers and partakers of the divine nature. St John of Damascus, writing in the eighth century, makes a remarkable observation. The word God in the scriptures refers not to the divine nature or essence, for that is unknowable. God refers rather to the divine energies the power and grace of God which we can perceive in this world. The Greek word for God, Theos, comes from a verb meaning to run, to see or to burn. These are energy words, not essence words. In John 10:34 Jesus, quoting Psalm 82:6, repeats the statement, You are gods. The fact that he was speaking to a group of religious leaders who were accusing him of blasphemy allows, in my opinion, for the following interpretation: Jesus is not using the term god to refer to the divine nature. We are gods in that we bear his image, not his nature. Deification means that we are to become more like God through his grace, that is through his divine energies. The process of our being renewed in Gods image and likeness (Gen. 1:26) began when the Son of God assumed our humanity in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary. Thus, those who are joined with Christ through faith in holy baptism enter into a re-creation process, being renewed in Gods image and likeness. Based on the earlier Council of Chalcedon, as well as on the theology of Saint Maximus the Confessor (c.580-662), Palamas strenuously defended the churchs teaching that a direct, personal experience of God himself (theosis) was accessible through Gods energies made available through the hypostatic union of the two natures of Christ. The incarnate Word hypostasized human nature and acted in accordance with the divine and human wills. There was thus a sharing of attributes (communication idiomatum) whereby the humanity of Christ was penetrated by the divine energies and thereby deified. Those divine energies, which we partake of, were not understood as an impersonal something from God but as God himself because Christ is consubstantial (homoousios) with the Father. Through the incarnate Christ, God gives himself to us in such a living, personal way that the gift and the giver are one and the same. Historically, deification has often been illustrated by the sword and fire metaphor. A steel sword is thrust into a hot fire until the sword takes on a red glow. The energy of the fire penetrates the sword. The sword never becomes fire, but it picks up the properties of fire. By application, the divine energies penetrate the human nature of Christ. Being joined to Christ, our humanity is interpenetrated with the energies of God through Christs glorified flesh. Nourished by the body and blood of Christ, we partake of the grace of God his strength, his righteousness, his love and are enabled to serve him and glorify him. Thus we, being human, are being deified. Theosis means the transformation of being into true personhood in the person of Christ. The conclusion is that the ontology of personhood and communion which emerges from the understanding of the eucharist as a communion event in the body of Christ forms the basis for the understanding of the God-world relation, and more importantly, the patristic notion of energies. In this context, we can see that theosis is trinitarian through unity in the hypostasis of Christ. Theosis is, therefore, the ultimate goal toward which all people should strive, the blessed telos for which all things were made. It describes the ineffable descent of God to the ultimate limit of our fallen human condition, even unto death a descent of God which opens to men a path of ascent, the unlimited vistas of the union of created beings with the Divinity. Deification is a descriptive term for Gods redemptive activity towards human beings. When human beings respond to this activity, the ultimate transformation of a human being without losing personhood is made possible. It is a process that should be understood in a carefully qualified sense, as an ongoing process, going from one realm of glory to another (2 Cor. 3:18). Even when the term deification is not explicitly mentioned it is implicitly present as the content of the salvation proclaimed by the gospel. [hed]Conclusions [list]In terms of a definition of what it means to be human, we may assert the following: The human being is the image of God and at the same time is called to his resemblance (likeness). Jesus incarnation, cross and resurrection do not only make possible the salvation of human beings, but also herald the starting point (beginning) of their deification. The basis for the deification of human beings is found in Jesus Christs deified nature. An example of this reality can be found in John 20:19-20. Here we read of the resurrected Jesus appearing to his ten disciples. He enters the house and stands in their midst although the doors were shut. The justification and sanctification of human beings are two different processes with three distinct stages: [list2] I have been saved started in faith, repentance, baptism and Eucharist; b. I am being saved achieved by means of the life in Christ; c. I shall be saved continued in the process of deification in eternity. 5. The death of the body does not mean the dissolution of the human being, but it represents the entry into a new existence in Gods presence. From this perspective, human beings are immortal.

social work :: essays research papers

Title: The consumer in-home provider satisfaction survey. Problem Statement: The practicum agency that I work at is the Allegheny County Area Agency on Aging which is located in downtown Pittsburgh. The purpose of my agency is to help senior citizens over the age of 60, who need services. I work in the PDA waiver (Pennsylvania Department of Aging) section that is made up of eight caseworkers, two typists, and one supervisor. My department’s mission is to provide current information of services and programs available to senior citizens and their families. The overall mission of the agency is to plan, organize, coordinate, convene, programs and funds where possible to the elderly of Allegheny County. The goal of my agency is to satisfy the consumer therefore, my survey will help determine how satisfied consumers are with the services they receive through the PDA Waiver program.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  PDA Waiver offers home and community based services to low-income consumers as an alternative to nursing home care. The financial eligibility requirements are $2,000 in resources and less than $1,593 in monthly income. The functional eligibility requirement is that consumers must be age 60 or older and nursing home eligible. There are fourteen different services that the PDA Waiver program offers to consumers. The services are typical of those provided in nursing homes. I will be examining how satisfied the PDA Waiver consumers are with their in-home providers. In-home providers go into the home and assist consumers with actives of daily living (ADL) which include bathing, grooming, eating, transferring, and toileting. In-home providers also assist with instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) such as preparing meals, laundry, shopping, transportation, and money management. I will be looking at worker timeliness, agency reliability and worker timesheet compliance. After looking at those three elements, I will compare the consumer comfort level and overall satisfaction with surveys that were conducted in the past. The results from my survey will allow my agency to work with the in-home providers that had a low score, so that the consumers are satisfied with their services. Participants: There are approximately 350 PDA Waiver consumers that receive services through my agency. I am going to do a random sample of the consumers that have been receiving services for more than one month. I will randomly choose 75 names from the list of PDA Waiver consumers that have been receiving services for at least one month.