Born Again Essay Essays - Religion, Creative Works,

Born Again Essay By Ellie Jo Koehn Would you risk your reputation, your family, your career and your entire life for what you believed? In the book Born Again, Charles (Chuck) Colson does just this. He had built up a reputation and carrer to be rivled, and he laid all that down for Christ. Chuck Colson had been accused of involvement in the Watergate scandal of 1972. The false accusations included conspiring to cover up the Watergate burglaries. However, he pleaded guilty to a different charge; obstruction of justice, specifically the defamation of character of Daniel Ellsberg. We can all agree that Chuck Colson professed faith in Christ, but the disagreement occurs in whether or not he should or should not have pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice. Chuck Colson should have pleaded guilty for three reasons. For truth, for ministry, and it was a strategic move. The first reason Chuck Colson should have pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice for truth. He had exposed information about Ellsberg right when he knew it would be the most hurtful. Although the information he exposed was true, he knew in his heart that what he did was objectively wrong. However, it wasn't typically considered a crime because it was so common in the political arena. He felt compelled to bring the whole truth to light, even though it might have hurt him in the long run. God moved in his heart and urged him to come clean. The second reason Chuck Colson should have pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice is for ministry. Although he didn't know it at the time of his decision, Chuck Colson was used by God to minister to prisoners, many of that would eventually come to Christ because of him. He ultimately found that his purposed lied not in politic but in ministry. By experiencing the injustices of the prison system firsthand, he was able to effectively advocate and minister to those in that situation. The third reason Chuck Colson should have pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice is that it was a strategic move. Although his intentions for pleading guilty weren't for his own strategic gain, the benefit was there. He was able to secure a lesser sentence than it would have been if he was convicted for other charges, although, it was ultimately extended. His sentence was the lesser of two evils. Some say that Chuck Colson should not have pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice. They say that he was manipulating the system. They argue that he was being evasive of the justice he deserved. However, this is not valid because his intentions were pure. They also say that he was abandoning his family. This is also invalid because they were taken care of, and it was the right thing to do. In summary, both of these arguments are invalid. In conclusion, Chuck Colson should have pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice for truth, ministry, and it was strategic. This matters to all who are faced with risky decisions. We can either do the right thing with possibly devastatin consequences, or we can play it safe.