Reality Check 101

For quite some time now, Holland has been involved in no small amount of controversy regarding the installation of a “peace pole” on public property, specifically one of our parks. It would bear the multilingual prayer “May Peace Prevail on Earth”. At first glance, installing the eight foot tall, eight-sided, sixteen languages, wood and Plexiglas monument appears to be a fairly transparent issue easily decided. Things have turned out to be a bit more complicated.

 
The issue really revolves around three core parts; political, religious and the sponsoring organization. As it turns out, the organization involved, the Holland Peacemakers (HPM), has been the primary catalyst for shaping the discussion along political and religious lines. For that reason, the associations and actions of HPM cannot be separated from the political and religious challenges they raise.
From the political perspective, it is important to remember that West Michigan is still governed representatively. Majorities dictate public policy and the use of public lands, not minorities. The level of division over the peace pole initiative has demonstrated a lack of overwhelming majority support. A public-representing city council listens to the voices of their constituents.
But there is more to consider politically. Recently HPM was emailed the following questions but declined to provide answers: 1) What other wars or conflicts has your organization publicly protested? 2) Your website says that Jo Anne Brooks and Elsie Lamb received training in Washington D.C. Who was that training with or through what organization? 3) Are you associated with or have you cooperated or communicated with either the World Peace Prayer Society or Peace Pole Makers (Joe & Carol Spaulding)? 4) Are you familiar with the UN50th PEACE POLE PROJECT of October, 1995, David C. Williams Jr., and the contents of that initiative as presented to the UN? If so, do you agree with its contents? 5).How does the peace pole work? In other words, what does it accomplish in real results and how does it do it?
The reasons for the questions are really quite simple. Monuments represent ideas, their makers, and those who support their existence. If the peace pole is simply an expression of the will of the people, no problem. If it more accurately represents a minority organization’s ideas, it is incumbent upon civil leadership to investigate what the monument and the organization stand for and determine whether or not community values are represented. Which piece of public property the pole is on or what is on a name plate is completely irrelevant.
A little checking yields interesting results. In reference to question one above, every HPM campaign and public protest has been distinctively leftist. Politically speaking, their targets have been few and invariably conservative. If anyone doubts their leanings, a visit to the HPM website and its links will suffice.
Question two speaks to the formative values and training of HPM. Not surprisingly, HPM declined to explain the Washington D.C. connection of their origin, though it should become clear below.
Questions three and four open a whole new window of understanding. The modern origin of the peace pole movement seems to begin in 1955. In that year, Masahisa Goi founded the World Peace Prayer Society (WPPS) in Japan after claiming to have “discovered the universality of the prayer ‘ May Peace Prevail on Earth ‘ “. He soon began producing peace poles and establishing the “peace plazas” (comprised a pole set in soil, two benches and stone walks) – closely mirrored by HPM’s proposals.
By 1988, the WPPS moved their world headquarters to New York and two years later had been accepted by the United Nations as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) under the U.N.’s Department of Information. In that capacity, WPPS maintains a position on the governing bodies of the Committee of Religious NGO’s, the U.N. Religious Initiative, the Values Caucus and the Spiritual Caucus. In 1995 the peace pole was formally accepted by the U.N. as a “venerable object” that would embody the idea of “Global Peace Zones” and protect “both Land and Life”.
In a July 27th Holland Sentinel article, a Holland Peacemaker representative was quoted as stating that the pole initiative had “no partisan or political message”. Apparently, HPM does not consider the scandal-ridden United Nations a political body. One can only assume that they have not noticed the U.N.’s blatant anti-family, anti-American attempts at weakening of our nation’s sovereignty through various international treaties and programs. In essence, Holland’s peace pole movement has little or nothing to do with the will, political sentiments, or culture of most Hollanders or of West Michigan in general.
Questions four and five expose the religious part of peace pole history. The founder of the movement, Masahisa Goi, taught, contrary to everything Christian, that words, thoughts and actions are living things that “radiate vibration and energy” and that they even influence the destiny of “plants and animals”. Being alive, his prayer, “May Peace Prevail on Earth”, is actually intended to transform “global consciousness” therefore causing global peace. One writer within the original U.N. effort, David C. Williams, once wrote that “the Globe is …Our Altar”. He pleaded for a “Global Mind”; “One Mind, One Creation” (capitalizations are his). In other words, more peace poles and higher popular veneration of their inscription is to yield more “vibration” and “energy” toward a one world consciousness. As a matter of fact, according to the WPPS website, there is a hollow pole in the lobby of the U.N. headquarters in New York into which visitors are invited to insert prayers.

All of this may sound confusing to western ears, but it is nothing unusual in oriental philosophies. In our country, the New Age Movement inculcates most of the same teachings along with major eastern religions.
The problem with the peace pole’s religious purpose and history is not in the existence of other belief systems, but in its application as an assumption of public sentiment. It speaks in direct opposition to the dominant regional Judeo-Christian culture and convictions, especially to those of us who are traditional Christ-followers. It does not and cannot speak for West Michigan, let alone Holland.
Even more distressing is its promotion in the name of Christ and the misrepresentation of Scripture. Jesus’ statement, “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Mt 5:9) has almost nothing to do with war or government or international relations. His sermon was a call to kingdom values on an individual level. To say otherwise runs completely counter to the rest of Biblical revelation. Both the Old and New Testaments depict God (Christ) as using wars and rumors of wars as part of holy judgment. Governments are called into existence for the ultimate purpose of promoting justice and righteousness, even through the use force if necessary – not through negotiating with evil.
Ultimately, Biblically speaking, peace is not a production of global wishes or local manipulation, or accumulated energy from words inscribed on wood and Plexiglas. Peace begins first in the individual heart as it submits to the mastery of Christ and His written revelation, the Bible. Peace is and always will be, even internationally, the work of the person of God’s Holy Spirit, not of a universal Mind or One or Consciousness. If anyone desires the fruit (peace through the Spirit) they need only attend to the Vine.
If anyone wishes to erect more peace monuments to the United Nations and eastern religious doctrine, they have the freedom to do so on their temple, church and private properties. I propose an alternative for the city council’s consideration. If we must, why not erect a marker in the form of something American, say a liberty bell. And, given the religious tenor of HPM’s efforts as well as the true nature of the council’s constituency, inscribe on it these words: “May faith, hope and love endure until the Prince of Peace prevails”.