The main signs of division in the U.S. began to show in the early 1830’s after the abolitionist movements and also after the Mexican war which resulted in a lot of land acquisition. There was difference in interests over the use of the new acquired land which resulted in tension mounting. Slavery which also intensified later on also fueled division between the Northern states and the southern states. These issues characterized the beginning of the civil war because the two sides had differences in economics and culture. The northern states were for the abolitionists movement lead by William Lloyd who was against slavery although the southern states so no problem with the practice because they were benefiting greatly from the trade in their farms.
Cheap or free labour was among the reasons they did not want to do away with slavery. They thought that the aim of the northerners was to spark slave revolts (Dred, 2007). Efforts to solve the division resulted in compromise to form free states but this efforts were futile. Most politicians in the South opposed this efforts led by John Calhoun. However the main cause of division was the vast land that had been acquired in the Mexican war. The southerners wanted the land be allocated for farming of cotton while the Northerners ion the other hand wanted more free states. This heightened differences for both sides.
The American civil war took place between years 1861 and 1865. It was a war aimed at preserving the Union which was the U.S. There was difference in ideas as to the role which the formed federal government was to play. Some believed that the federal government was supposed to maintain power (Bruce & James, 2007). This believe was popular among the federalists. The non federalists on the other hand believed that states should maintain more power and have the right to determine its own laws and thus should be allowed to act independent of federal government’s mandate. At this time when the rights of states where being passed, there was a lot of disagreements on major issues of taxation, slavery among others. This period was characterized by hatred and protests against laws regarding slavery (Woloch, 2008).
Slavery however came to an end eventually after a long struggle and events characterized by violence and killings. The ending of slavery was an important milestone in ending the war because most issues were based around slavery such as land issues. Efforts to end slavery were many some including publications that showed negative effects of slavery in America. Such publications include Uncle Toms Cain by Harriet Beecher which was received with optimism and became a best seller. Bills such as the Kansas Nebraska bill allowed for sovereignty which was popular although it caused most southerners relocate to Kansas to make it a slave state. This activities however sparked issues that led to the sacking of pro slavery vigilantes.
Later on Abraham Lincoln came to power due to his anti slavery efforts although he did not use this as a tool to win. Southerners did not like this at all and there were fears he was to be assassinated (Woloch, 2008). He however assured the nation that he would settle most of the nation’s differences. He even responded to attacks by South Carolina by initiating a naval blockade of southern ports reducing the chance of the south defeating the North. He however meet a lot of resistance which made changes in tactics necessary to ensure American Liberty. He waited for a military victory which happened in 1862. Events afterwards lead to the destruction of the southern economy and the death of Lincoln after he was shot dead. This marked the end of the civil war.
Andrew Johnson took over in 1865 but failed to satisfy congress. Some Republicans plotted to remove in from power which eventually worked out. Ulysses S. Grant was later elected President in a bid to reconstruct America. He was an honest man but gullible which made his administration corrupt. His rule did not last long. Republicans decided to strike a one term deal with Rutherford B. Hayes a republican candidate in 1876 that would make sure he did no turn out like Grant and ensuring that he would end corruption and promote reconstruction. This lead to a famous compromise in 1877.
Bruce Catton, James M. McPherson. (2007). The Civil War. England: Mariner books.
Dred Scott. (2007). Fight for freedom: Africans in America. Retrieved on October 20, 2009 from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2932.html.
H., & Woloch, N. (2008). The Enduring Vision: A History of the American people. Boston:Houghton Mifflin Company.
Sharpe, J. (2009). The Civil War and Reconstruction. Retrieved on October 20, 2009, from http://angel.gcu.edu/section/default.asp?id=80878 Boyer, P., Clark, C., Kett, J., Salisbury, N., Sitkoff,
Confidentiality has been defined in The Social Work Dictionary as: A principle of ethics according to which the social worker or other professional may not disclose information about a client without the client's consent. This information includes the identity of the client, content of overt verbalizations, professional opinions about the client, and material from the records. In specific circumstances, social workers and other professionals may be compelled by law to reveal to designated authorities some information (such as threats of violence, commission of crimes, and suspected child abuse) that would be relevant to legal judgments (Barker, 1995).
In the 1996 revision, confidentiality is highlighted in three specific areas of practice: with clients, with colleagues, and in research. In Section 1.07 of the current Social Work Code of Ethics eighteen different categories of responsibility social workers have towards their clients' confidentiality are outlined (NASW, 1996, revised 1999).
The fact that there are eighteen provisions, more than any other area in the code, demonstrates the importance of confidentiality to the profession of social work. These points specifically address what is considered confidential material, with whom and when that material can be released, and when and how this information should be explained to clients. Specific highlights include:
Social workers have permission to disclose information only with the proper consent of the client. Social workers should inform clients about confidentiality, and when and to whom disclosure is appropriate. Social workers cannot disclose information to third party payers without consent of the client. Social workers should not discuss confidential information unless privacy can be assured. Confidentiality should be maintained in a technological office that includes computers, faxes, and cellular phones.
Exceptions to confidentiality; there are times in the course of the client-worker relationship that the client may voluntarily rescind confidentiality. There are other times where confidentiality is not legally binding on the social worker. These circumstances relate to safety of the client or others.
Important issues related to confidentiality include client consent, duty to warn, and privileged communication. Consent. There are many times where it would be beneficial for a social worker to talk to others who are involved in the client's life. This might focus on obtaining third party reimbursement, additional history, collateral collaboration, court testimony or sharing information with other service providers. With managed care, clients generally want reassurance that their sessions will be covered, but that only the minimum amount of information is provided to the insurance company (Corcoran & Winslade, 1994). Therefore, clients often allow social workers to release information to insurance providers, including diagnosis and treatment plans, but rely on workers to not divulge every aspect of their drug and/or alcohol use.
A second occasion when a social worker may seek a client's consent is in pursuing additional history from collateral sources or corroboration of information. This will occur primarily during initial assessment; however, it might take place later during the treatment process. For instance,
when a client is admitted to a psychiatric unit, there may be a need for additional information such as family history of psychiatric disorders or substance abuse, the precipitating event, or the client's current living arrangements. Such additional information, usually provided
by a family member, may be beneficial in making an assessment and verifying a client's information.
Findings of confidentiality in substance abuse counseling are scholarly in that it shows how applying the standard confidentiality rules for basic social work practice is not adequate or acceptable when working with substance abusing clients and may well cause legal and ethical difficulties.
Comparison is most exhibited in the above articles mostly in the way of addressing practitioners know how which is clearly a hindrance in effective counseling. All articles observe reluctance on part of therapists in observing ethics code. Also all three articles address ethical issues in counseling. Furthermore all articles observe the importance of practitioners to observe code of ethics. All three articles support each other.
Information in all the articles can be synthesized in terms of observing substance councelling which is discussed in all the articles. This can address all issues brought forward in addiction councelling. By broadly talking about ethical issues in substance addiction councelling, this will address all concerns.
Barker, R.., Duncan, J. & Lees, A. (1989). Society for the Study of Addiction to Alcohol and other Drugs. N.Y: McMillan.
Barbara S. (2005). Substance abuse Treatment, 257
Cohen, A., & Hatherleigh, L. (2000). Directions in Substance Abuse Counseling.California: McGraw.
Kevin, C., William J. (1994). Behave Sci Law Addiction and the law: confidentiality to disclosure. Oxford: OUP.
Kerry J Breen, Venon P, Stephen C. (1997). Ethics, law and Medical Practice, 367
Marlatt, G A., Baer J. S.,Donvan, D. M., & Kivlahan., D. R. (1988). “Addictive behaviors: etiology and treatment.” British journal of addiction, 83 (2), 171-81.
(NASW). (1996, revised 1999). “National Association of Social”. Journal of Addiction and Offender Counseling. 17(1), 35-42.
Powledge, T. M. (1999). “Addiction and the brain”. Bioscience, 49(7), 513-519.
Scott, C.G. (2000). Ethical Issues in Addiction Counseling. University of North Florida.
Introduction: The Ark of the Covenant
The Ark of the Covenant was a wooden chest according to the description in Exodus 25:10-22. It was built after the Exodus from Egypt by the Children of Israel right after Moses received the Ten Commandments at Mt. Sinai. The size of the Ark of the Covenant is given in cubits which would be approximately 4 x 2.5 feet. The Ark that we see in movies is too big according to the original size but otherwise it is pretty close. The top of the Ark was covered by a slab that was overlaid in gold and decorated using two cherubim and outstretched wings. The cherub however creates some controversy and no one today is certain, however the consensus of many scholars is that the cherub was probably a winged lion that had a human head.
The Ark of the Covenant is believed to have housed the tablets that contain the original Ten Commandments. There is however a rumor that it held a rod which is believed to have done miracles and also other magical items. The Ark of the Covenant traveled with the Israelites during there journey in the wilderness. It was carried using two poles that were put through the gold rings on the side of the Ark to carry it. The Ark is not mentioned much after the Israelites had succeeded in conquering the land of Israel, but it is assumed that it was moved a bit city to city. At one point, the Ark was handed over to a family for safe keeping and so it settled down. Ultimately, it is David that brought the Ark to Jerusalem, in 1000 BC.
In Jerusalem, it was put in the Temple in Jerusalem that was built by King Solomon. Here it stayed in a center room permanently called the Holy of Holies. The High Priest visited the Ark on one day each year thus at most times it was out of sight. The Ark isn’t mentioned again in the bible except in a brief reference during King Josiah’s reign (640 - 609 BC). In 587 BC, Jerusalem was captured by the Babylonians who destroyed the Temple. The Ark disappears from history after the destruction but later the Jews rebuilt the Temple later, however there is no mention of the Ark in the books of Nehemiah and Ezra which covers the rebuilding of the Temple and it is assumed that the Ark wasn't there thus it was not mentioned.
The Ark was considered a very holy item and very few objects in Judaism are considered this holy. The Bible doesn’t describe magic on the Ark. God used the Ark to communicate with Moses according to (Exodus 25:22) and later similarly for Solomon thus the ark can be described as the footstool of God’s throne according to I Chronicles 28:2. If we follow the journey of the Ark in I Samuel 13, we see the Israelites fighting with the Philistines, and later bringing the Ark to their battle for inspirational purpose. The Philistines however won the battle and thus captured the Ark which is contrary to believe that we get from movies and other works that the Ark fought battles and won them for the Israelites. This time it brought them bad luck as they lost. The philistines however did not benefit from taking the Ark as we see them suffering a lot.
Their main idol called Dagon kept falling over and they got all sorts of plagues and diseases. This made them return the Ark seven months later back to the Israelites. They said they didn’t want any more. The bible is very clear on these nuisances of disease as it had come from God's anger and not from any magic in the Ark itself. According to II Samuel 6:3-7, we see a bizarre incident as the Ark is being taken back to Jerusalem, Uzzah the son of Abinadab, touches the Ark as it is being moved because it was wobbling and seemed to topple off the cart. Uzzah falls dead on the spot an incident that we can interpret to mean that the Ark was not to be touched by anyone.
What happens to the Ark.
We however have many definitions of what the Ark was even outside the bible teaching. For instance, Erich Von Daniken thinks that the stories in the bible tell of visits made by outer space creatures we commonly call aliens. He also claims that the Ark of the Covenant was an electric generator of some kind with rings on the side which took the bibles representation of the poles that were used to create some sort of electromagnet. A microphone on the Ark allowed aliens to communicate with the priests through the Ark which he interprets as the voice of God and that is how Uzzah got electrocuted. This is pretty imaginative according to many bible readers and believers however it is important to explore all possible works and believes that can help define the Ark of the Covenant. His explanation is not convincing as he doesn’t mention in length how the plagues and diseases came to Philistines.
Looking at what happened to the Ark after the Babylonians took it, we can guess that most likely the melted it down in order to acquire the gold after they had destroyed the Temple. They probably didn’t value the role of the Ark to the Israelites after they had conquered them and gold was probably more valuable to them than the Ark. There are however other opinions. On what happened to the Ark. There is a famous rabbinic legend that was written down at around 100 BC but presumably older which states that when the Babylonians had invaded the Temple, the temple priests hurled the Ark towards the sky and God took it back into Heaven. Many critics and modernists find this very hard to accept literally because given the fact that gravity is more effective in explanation than faith; the legend doesn’t offer much that can be taken in.
The is another explanation on what happened to the Ark according to the apocryphal book 2 Maccabbees dating 100 BC suggests that the Ark was not thrown upwards but hidden by the priests in order to save it from Babylonians and it is believed to be in a cave somewhere around in the Dead Sea or perhaps where we call the West Bank at Mount Nebo. Some people say the Ark was hidden in a secret cave by the priests under the Temple Mount that was carved out by Solomon or King Josiah at around 640 - 609 BC.
The explanations however don’t stop there. In 1991, a journalist the name Graham Hancock wrote a book: SIGN AND SEAL that claims the Ark is currently in a small church that is in the desert in Ethiopia. He claims in his book that the Ark was actually stolen by Solomon's son who was an outcast and he carried the Ark to Ethiopia and kept it there secretly through some Judaic cult. It is then believed that the Knights Templar then came along thinking that the Ark was the Holy Grail and converted the Jews to Christianity hence keeping the Ark in a church hidden and unseen even by the faithful.
In conclusion towards the whereabouts of the Ark, it is important to factor in the English translation effect on the Bible that can lead to confusion since words such as the ark are used for both the Ark of the Covenant and also to describe Noah's Ark. The original text in Hebrew uses different words so it is important to note that there is no linguistic relation between this two “Arks”.
The Story of Tudor Parfitt and his journey tracking down the Ark of the Covenant
According to the Story of Tudor Parfitt who was a scholar and an adventurer, we see him tracking down the Ark of the Covenant from when it was last seen in action. We see the Ark of the Covenant in action, as it is been dug up by Indiana Jones in Egypt and the ark is napped by Nazis, who is incinerate by the Ark amidst a tempest of terrifying apparitions. However according to Tudor Parfitt, Raiders of the Lost Ark got it wrong and the Ark is in fact not anywhere near Egypt. Tudor claims he has traced the Ark it or the container in which the original Ark had been put to a dusty bottom shelf in a museum in Harare, Zimbabwe.
The creators of Indiana Jones's clearly understand the Ark to be one of the Bible's holiest objects and also one of the most maddening Mc Guffins. The description of the size and components of the Ark is consistent with other descriptions which is a wooden box 4 ft. x 2 ft. x 2.5 ft, gold-plated carried on poles. The Bible last known location of the Ark is in Solomon's temple, where the Babylonians destroyed. Scholars have been having continuous debates on its current location ever since if it still exists. Most believe it is beneath Jerusalem's Temple Mount which to Muslims is the Noble Sanctuary others say the Ark is in France while others believe it is near a London's Temple station.
Parfitt who is a professor at London’s prestigious School of Oriental and African Studies in his new book The Lost Ark of the Covenant opens a new dimension on the history of Israel and what happened to the Ark of the Covenant. Although the professor is well respected and has been right before, his Ark fixation brings up great controversy because he claims that after living with a Southern African clan in the 1980s called the Lemba, he claims that the clan were a lost tribe of Israel. This claim however bizarre can validate some claims made on the whereabouts of the covenant as some scholars believe it is somewhere in South Africa. Parfitt has been moked for making these remarks by many including his Colleagues. In 1999 however, a genetic marker was found to be unique to Lemba's priestly only specific to the descendents of Judaism Temple priests. This discovery made global news however it still doesn’t uncover the mystery behind the Ark of the Covenant’s current position.
Parfitt work on the Ark didn’t stop here. He started wondering on another aspect of the Lemba's credible oral history which was a drum like object called ngoma lungundu. The ngoma, was a near divine that was used to store ritual objects according to the Lemba. It was borne on poles that were inserted into rings which is similar to the Ark of the Covenant description. It was also too holy to be kept in direct contact with the ground or be touched by persons that were not priests. It was also believed to emit some strong powers that killed enemies of the Lemba and occasionally the Lemba. This was gotten from a Lemba elder who also told Parfitt, that this ngoma had come from the temple in Jerusalem and later carried down to the location through Africa.
This story by Parfitt's estimation may be partly true or false. He is not certain himself and has no sure way of really knowing the validity of this claim. However, there is a theory as to where the lemba people might have eventually have converged with the Israelites hence the exchange. The Lemba myth highlights a city called Senna. In modern day Yemen, in a place where people genetically link to the Lemba people, Parfitt found a town by that same name. It is very possible that the Lemba might have migrated to this place from Jerusalem through a spice route and from Senna, through a nearby port, where they could have launched a long sail downwards to the African coast. Regarding the Ark of the Covenant, before Islam, Arabia has numerous Jewish controlled oases and in 500 AD, this was the period's only Jewish kingdom.
In many instances, the area might have been home to the exiled Jews that bore a special burden. Parfitt in his work also found out that there were eighth century accounts of the Ark of the Covenant in Arabia by the Jews who had turned to Muslims. He argues that there is a time in this period that the Lemba acted as caretakers of the Ark. Parfitt's final search for the ngoma, which he dropped from sight in the 1940s, landed him into some hostile territories where he was attacked according to his book. The Ark leads have guided him to Ethiopia, Egypt and New Guinea, until one day his last clues led him to a storeroom in a Harare Museum in Zimbabwe. Here he found an old drum with a burnt black bottom hole. The remains of this drum had carrying rings on the corners and also had raised relief of reeds that Parfitt interprets to reflect an Old Testament sign.
Parfitt strongly thinks that whatever supernatural character the Ark represented, it was almost accurate to the ngoma, which is the closest will ever get to the current location of the Ark if it still exists. The drum element brought about by Parfitt is somewhat the biggest stretch ever since the scripture never straightforwardly describes the Ark this way. He bases his assumptions and findings on the Ark's frequent association to trumpets and also on aspects of Bible passages where King David is seen dancing in the presence of the Ark.
Why the Ark of the Covenant was created and the contents of Ark of the Covenant
The Ark of the Covenant is well known for its mysterious powers and help to Israelites against the enemies of Israel according to (I Samuel chapters 5 & 6). The Ark of the Covenant resided in the innermost room of the Tabernacle in the temple. Access to the Ark was only on the Day of Atonement and it was restricted to only one person only, the high priest who had to come enter the tabernacle with the blood of a goat to represent a sacrifice on behalf of himself and the people of Israel's sins. Most people associated the Ark with judgment and wrath. It was believed the Day of Judgment was soon coming when God would judge the secrets of the people's hearts according to (Romans 2:16). The Ark had a cover that was known as the Propitiation Cover or Mercy Seat which was where the blood of a goat was sprinkled by the high priest when he visited the Ark on the Day of Atonement. This was to appease God's anger for the sins that had been committed by the people of Israel.
According to Romans 3:24-25, we read that there is redemption in Jesus Christ, because God sent Him forth as a propitiation, through the faith in His blood. When Christ died, the price was paid and to all those who believe in the Son of God, Jesus Christ and his death for their sins, then there is mercy. In the Ark, God dwelt in form of unapproachable light according to (I Timothy 6:16 and Psalm 104:2). The high priest the only one allowed to visit the Ark had to shield his eyes because according to (Exodus 33:20) it is written that "no man shall see Me and live”. We see this in Moses’ meeting with God in (Exodus 25:21-22 and Leviticus 16:14-15). The Lord’s glory filled the Tabernacle on the day of Atonement and it was reared up and anointed according to (Exodus 40:9,18,34-35), which is exactly two weeks short of an year since the Exodus according to (Exodus 40:2; 12:6,31).
We can appreciate the numerous findings by many scholars as to the whereabouts of the covenant however none of this works including Parfitts’ can claim the exact position of the Ark or what happened to it. Even from Parfitts’ conclusion which is so far the most detailed, we can’t be certain 100%. Parfitt concludes that a splinter has carbon dated the drum back to the 1350 AD which is too ancient for an African wood artifact at the time. Parfitt is certain that this is the Ark that is referred to in the Lemba tradition and the Lemba legend believes it is the original ngoma that destroyed itself about 400 years ago finally rebuilding itself on its own ruins with the help of a priest to replace the previous Ark. There has to be little doubt concerning the findings of Parfitts as what he found was the last thing on earth that is in direct descent from the Ark.
According to Shimon Gibson who is a well known biblical archeologist, he admits there is some doubt in Parfitt’s findings. He is described in Parfitt’s work but still in his own opinion agrees with most scholars in his line of work that it is highly unlikely that one can trace the whereabouts of the ark. He says that one has to make tremendous leaps and stresses that whoever has hope of finding the original biblical item which is the Ark will likely reject Parfitt's claims of finding something credible as there is a very high possibility of understudying.
It is thus impossible to say exactly where the Ark of the Covenant is today or where it was destroyed in history. According to Paul Raffaele, he concludes that in his final moments of his search for the Ark, he could not judge whether the ark rested inside a nondescript chapel. There is a whole lot of open ended questions that can’t be answered by scholars. A lot of the questions are based on answers that are assumptions and opinions of what probably happened to the Ark. Perhaps Menelik's traveling companions did take it and spirit it home to Ethiopia. The reality of the ark is like a vision which will remain as an old mystery in biblical history
Adams, C. (2001). The Straight Dope: What happened to the Ark of the Covenant?. The Straight Dope - Fighting Ignorance Since 1973. Retrieved June 21, 2010, from http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1401/what-happened-to-the-ark-of-the-covenant
Barrow, M. (2003.). Ark of Covenant Page. Relocate. Retrieved June 21, 2010, from http://www.domini.org/tabern/arkcovnt.htm
Biema, D. (2007). A Lead on the Ark of the Covenant - TIME. Breaking News, Analysis, Politics, Blogs, News Photos, Video, Tech Reviews - TIME.com. Retrieved June 21, 2010, from http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1715337,00.html
Hahn, S. (2006). Hail, Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God. New York: Image.
Munro-Hay, S. (2006). The Quest for the Ark of the Covenant: The True History of the Tablets of Moses (New Ed.). New York: I. B. Tauris.
Raffaele, P. (2007). Keepers of the Lost Ark? | People & Places | Smithsonian Magazine. History, Travel, Arts, Science, People, Places | Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved June 21, 2010, from http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/ark-covenant-200712.html?c=y&page=6
Richert, B. (n.d.). ethiopia and the ark of the covenant Â« the audacity of individuality. the audacity of individuality. Retrieved June 22, 2010, from http://brichert.wordpress.com/2006/10/10/ethiopia-and-the-ark-of-the-covenant/
Ryan, D. (2000). Chapter 11 The Ark of the Covenant . Complete Idiot's Guide to Biblical Mysteries (1 ed., pp. 136-144). New York: Alpha.
Shyovitz, D. (n.d.). The Lost Ark of the Covenant. Jewish Virtual Library - Homepage. Retrieved June 21, 2010, from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/ark.html
Souvay, C. (1907). CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Ark of the Covenant. NEW ADVENT: Home. Retrieved June 21, 2010, from http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01721a.htm