Flat

What is with the flat tires? Last weekend it was my son and yesterday it was my wife. She came home from dropping off my daughter in a neighboring town and said she had a flat. Sure enough, a hunk of metal was sticking out of the tread. I jacked up the car just enough to keep the rim from cutting the tire and waited until this morning.

I got it fixed quickly this morning so hopefully we are good to go, thanks to our neighborhood car shop. I was a little worried that we had ruined the tire because Kim said the tire pressure warning light came on but she thought she could make it home. It was pretty flat by the time she got here. I don't know why she doesn't heed warning lights. She did that about 25 years ago when a temp light came on because a freeze plug rusted out. That was expensive. Apparently warning lights are made to be ignored, in her mind.

Republicans and Positive Non-intervention

As someone who has a cynical view regarding the motivations of most politicians I usually don't say much about politics. No doubt there are people all across the political spectrum with less than honorable motivations for the positions they hold. However, When it comes to fighting poverty I think there are people on all sides who genuinely want to help. The question then becomes how to help.

This is where we start hearing about big government vs small government. Most Democrats believe that the best way to help the impoverished is to develop or expand government programs to aid people in poverty. The Republicans, on the other hand, are often seen as people who believe that the best way to help poor people is to leave them to fend for themselves and give incentives to people who do well. And though there may be people who believe this, it isn't really the foundation of their approach.

At its foundation, the Republican model of helping the poor is based on the positive non-intervention principles as applied by the minister of finance of Hong Kong, John Cowperthwaite. During his tenure an extremely high percentage of the population moved out of poverty and into the middle class. At one point the average income in Hong Kong surpassed that of England. This was done mainly by Cowperthwaite's fierce insistence on positive non-interventionism. His most famous quote is, "In the long run, the aggregate decisions of individual businessmen, exercising individual judgment in a free economy, even if often mistaken, is less likely to do harm than the centralized decisions of a government; and certainly the harm is likely to be counteracted faster."

It may seem harsh on poor people but Cowperthwaite believed that the best way to help poor people was to have an economy that provided jobs. But he was also very insistent that the government wasn't going to subsidize business either. Some businessmen wanted the government to build a tunnel across Hong Kong Harbor but he wouldn't do it because he felt that if it was really a good thing business would find a way to pay for it. They did.

So that is why you see some Republicans insisting that we need a smaller government. It is also why some of the same were against the bailout of the auto-industry. (At present, a high percentage of people think that was a good thing but we will see in the long run.) These Republicans aren't pulling the ideas out of left field. There is a history to it that has had remarkable success.

Of course one of the failures of the Republican party has been its reluctance to do enough of the positive part of positive non-intervention. Positive steps must be taken to keep businesses from using harmful practices. The financial sector was allowed to operate in unethical ways when they should have been stopped.

I write this because I get tired of hearing that unless you spend a lot of money on a government program to help poor people you aren't doing what Jesus would want you to do. The fact of the matter is that there are people all across the spectrum who are sincere followers of Jesus who sincerely want to help poor people. It's not really always about a cash grab for the rich. Just because some do doesn't mean you completely abandon the principles. You just take positive steps to fix it.

Blowout

I got a call from my son Michael on Saturday saying that he had a flat tire and needed help changing it??? Really?? An 18 year old needs help changing a tire? What have I done wrong in the raising of my child?

When I got there I found one of the worst blowouts I have ever seen. On one side the sidewall had almost completely separated from the tread while the inner sidewall was about 50% separated. They were fairly new tires too. I had looked at the tires that morning and they weren't low. Not sure what happened but I am glad he stayed on the road and in one piece.

Certain

I remember hearing a saying somewhere that went, "I would rather know a few things for certain than a lot of things that ain't so." I can't even remember the context of it but I have remembered it for 30+ years. But I ran across something that Tim Keller wrote that I like too. "...one of the signs that you may not grasp the unique, radical nature of the gospel is that you are certain that you do."

And that is the most dangerous thing about it. Because you are certain that you do you have a tendency not even bother to check.

$3,000 Speeding Ticket

I have always found it interesting that traffic fines discriminate against poor people and yet I never see anything said about it. My basic understanding is that when you break traffic law you receive a punishment that will hopefully encourage you to not break the law again. It seems that the severity of the punishment should be equal for all violators. But it isn't.

A poor person who gets a speeding ticket is going to experience some real pain. At best the kids are going to have to make that milk stretch a lot farther and they can pretty much forget about meat protein for a few weeks. But that ticket also has the potential to cause them to fall behind on a payment, face higher insurance premiums, ruin their credit rating, get evicted, or even lose their job depending on the circumstances. Those are some pretty serious consequences.

Compare that to a rich person who gets the same ticket. They've lost 15 minutes of their day. And... And... And... Well, I can't think of much else. I guess if they do it enough times they can lose their license.

So here is my solution. Everyone's Adjusted Gross Income should be rounded up to the nearest thousand, divided by a thousand, and be readily available to law enforcement. Make $20,000 a year? Your number is 20. Make $76,000 a year? Your number is 76. A speeding ticket is then issued using that number in a formula.

For example, let's say the find is going to be 3 x your AGI. Make $20,000 a year? You pay $60. Make $50,000 a year? You pay $150. Make $100,000? You pay $300. And if you make $1,000,000 you pay $3,000.

Of course this still is far from perfect but it would be a step in the right direction. Maybe you would have to make some adjustments so that millionaire really feels the same pain. And I can already hear people saying that it won't work because rich people will simply hire lawyers. I have a solution for that too. Make the legal process to fight a ticket with a private lawyer require a lot of hours to accomplish. That way if you really want to hire a lawyer to fight a ticket it is still going to cost you a lot of money.

Guess who got passed the other day by a very nice Mercedes that was traveling at high speed.

If You Dare

An incredibly useful exercise... if you dare, is to put yourself in God's place and think about what it would take to create a being that had the capacity to truly love you. The key here is to think about true love.

Obviously, if we are forced to love it really isn't true love. So how much freedom would this being require? Does it require complete freedom, along with all the consequences that might come with it? Can I create restrictions or will that disqualify it from being true love?

What about influences? Would I have to create an environment for this being that does not influence the being to love or not to love? Is some influence allowed to be able to still call it true love? If so, how much?

Would I be able to manipulate the being I created, pushing it toward truly loving me? It seems unfair if I couldn't express my love for it first. Does that mean that any love returned to me is not really true love?

Fitting in with all of the above are things like sin, pain, loss, and sadness. Would these have to be allowed as options if true love were to exist. If the beings couldn't choose other than to love could they really express true love?

I know this is a difficult topic to process but I think it answers a lot of questions that people have about life. Like, "How can a loving God allow bad things to happen?" But if that is too much to think about I will settle for someone telling me why I have to put in html page break tags in this blog manually to get a space between paragraphs. Or better yet, how to fix it. This world has too many things to think about.

Never Mind

Have you ever started telling a story and suddenly realized it has nothing to do with the current conversation? This probably only happens to me but when it happens there are only a few options. You can keep telling the story while feverishly trying to find a reason why it might be relevant. Or you might try to think of a way to turn the story, no matter how awkward the turn might be, in a direction that adds relevance.

I am going to start choosing a third option. Just stop right in the middle of the story and say, "Never mind." Sure it will be awkward but at least I won't be wasting your time, as well as my own.

Tables Turned

It is weird when you find yourself in the position of having to talk friends down from their predictions of gloom and doom when you also feel that way. The Lions forum that I am part of is pretty much of the opinion that we need to fire everybody, trade away all of our good players, and release the rest. I find myself constantly telling people to relax, that we will get it turned around one of these decades.

Is this how my friend Dan feels when he is telling us not to be so negative?

Another First

On Saturday, December 1, 2012, I went over to my mom's house to rake leaves. The height of the grass kept bothering me. It wasn't really long but it wasn't as short as I thought it should be either. So I hauled out the lawnmower and mowed the grass.

I have lived in Africa so I have mowed a lawn in December before. But this is the first time I have ever done that in Indiana. I got some strange looks from people driving by but, even if I do say so myself, it looked a lot better when I was done.

Between Notes

I read an article that contained a comment from a well known guitar player about Jeff Beck. I don't remember the exact quote but basically he was saying that sometimes Beck would bend strings to create sounds in between notes and had the ability to string several together in a way that sounded good. Not really an A but not really a Bb either. If I try that it just sounds out of tune.

That got me thinking that either my life is out of tune or there are a lot of things in my life that are between notes. Between notes is hard because of the ambiguity. We are used to answers that fall right on the notes and if we find ourselves in between, the preferred solution is to just get back in tune. But is there value in staying in between?

There seems to be a lot of things that fit that category. It isn't really this or that. That family isn't poor enough to qualify for this program but they are not rich enough to make ends meet. So how do we help them? That person isn't qualified enough for that job but they are too qualified to dig ditches. That person isn't crazy enough to be institutionalized but not sane enough too...

It just seems like there is a lot of in between stuff in life. I don't know where I am going with any of this but I guess I feel kind of comfortable between notes and just want to say it is an okay place to be. So maybe I should stop trying so hard to tune up or down. I'll just stay in this weird sounding space and drive everyone else crazy.

Complexity

About 10 - 15 years ago my denomination was promoting a program that helped our churches identify strengths and weaknesses and how to improve those areas where we were weak. One of the main ideas was that we were to stop looking at our churches in a mechanistic way and we were to start looking at them as a living organism. We needed to understand that there were certain factors that were essential for growth. These factors influenced growth, not in a mechanistic way where there was direct correlation, but in a biotic way.

Overall, I thought the research behind the program was good. But I think it was just a start and not near ready to roll out as a tool to help us in our churches. But that is the way it is with a lot of research now days.

I applaud the recognition that we are more like a living organism than a machine. That was a breath of fresh air. I think most of us knew that but all we ever heard were mechanistic answers about how to bring about change. It was understandable because it fits into easy formulas that work well in conferences. This plus that minus those equals super church. We knew it didn't work like that so it was nice to hear that it was more similar to the complexities of a living organism.

But that is also the problem. The complexities mean that A LOT of research is required to truly understand what is going on. And even then we must be open minded how the next round of research will change our thinking. Every day we read about findings that are sensational and almost every time we eventually find out that someone jumped the gun. I keep waiting for that magic weight loss pill.

As a pastor I have to understand that our church is like a living organism with all its complexities and mysterious connections of one thing to another. I'm okay with that and so while I find new research helpful and interesting I am also cautious about what it is really saying, or more importantly, not saying. Thankfully there is someone we call the Holy Spirit that keeps us on track, if we listen and pay attention.

Glasses

After 3 years of reading glasses I finally went to get real glasses. I should stop right there because my kids say they don't count because I got them at Costco. Hey, the Dr. exam only cost $49.99 and I'm half Dutch so I don't care.

I don't know much about glasses. I told the Dr. that I work at a computer a lot and I read and write a lot. She said I should probably get progressive lenses because they would work whether I was looking at a computer screen or looking down to read a book so that's what I did.

I picked up my glasses the other day and all I can say is I'm not sure about these progressive lenses. At first I was almost afraid to take a step. It seemed like there was a 4 foot square box that was in focus and everything else was blurry. The tech said to point my nose at anything I wanted to see and after awhile my brain would be retrained to this new way of seeing.

The first time I tried to read a book was a disaster. There was a 3 inch wide piece of text that was in focus so I had to move my head from side to side to read the whole line. That made the book seem like it was rocking back and forth and almost made me seasick. Reading music while playing a guitar was even worse.

Everyone I have talked to says to stick with it because it will get better. It has been 3 days now and it has gotten better so maybe they are right. Maybe you can teach an old dog a new trick. Now I just have to find a place online where I can get a spare pair for dirt cheap.

Policy

Just a quick note before I forget. I have had a problem with policies for a long time now. I think policies are good but I believe that, by and large, we have over done them. It seems our greatest fear is that a situation will come for which we do not have a policy and we will actually have to make a decision that might be hard to make. So we make policies for every possible contingency and when we do have to make a decision we quickly add another policy so that we won't have to do it again.

The problem with this is that I believe that it cuts down on efficiency and can paint us into a corner where we lose flexibility. If you start hearing "but that is against our policy" enough times you begin to feel like the purpose is no longer the purpose and that the policy has become the purpose.

That is why I was surprised, but pleased, to see an article in the Delta in-flight magazine the other day with an interview with their president talking about breaking policies. He stated that they realized that in order to provide quality customer service they had to give their employees flexibility when it came to following policies. I think that is smart and I can see where an airline we be faced with just such a situation fairly often. I'm glad to see some good thinking when it comes to policies.

Black Forest

In the Black Forest near Calw. Had a long overnight flight so we are taking it easy today. It is kind of rainy here today but much cooler than Indiana.

Follower - Leader

I sometimes get frustrated with the emphasis on leadership in the church. Apparently that is the problem with the church today. I had someone kind of laugh the other day when they saw all the leadership books I own. We got to talking and he said that all the books, seminars, etc. are almost exactly what he goes through in the business world.

I have always thought that what the church needs is more people head-over-heels in love with Jesus. Not just "fully devoted" but compelled to be "fully devoted" because of their love.

Maybe that is the problem with the church. Maybe we need to focus on getting all of us pastors to be great followers of Jesus and not worry so much about the leadership aspect of it. Is it possible that great followers of Jesus would be led by the Spirit to empower those within their churches who have real leadership ability?

Fulltime or Bi-vocational

I have a son who is in a Bible Study in his dorm at IU. One day the leader told the group he would give a dollar to the first one who could name the Apostle Paul's trade. My son was shocked that he was the only one who knew. That might say something about biblical literacy today but I actually want to write about bi-vocational ministry so I thought I would start out by bringing up Paul.

Bi-vocational ministry is getting a lot of talk lately and most of it is positive. It allows for more access for ministry because it removes a major barrier, finances, which is especially important if you want to minister anywhere other than upper-middle class suburbs. It also gets people in ministry out of their cocoon and into the "real" world where they come face to face with the problems, struggles, and pain that most people face. And since everyone is supposed to be a minister anyway what's the use in having paid full-timers? Many times I've thought about becoming bi-vocational myself because I sometimes feel a disconnect between those I minister to/with and me. Several people have suggested that bi-vocational ministry will continue to be, not just a significant avenue for ministry, but should actually be THE preferred route considering the more hostile society seems to be toward Christianity.

Big mistake. Certainly there is room for bi-vocational ministry and that will continue to be the case. There are definite advantages to it and that makes it the only feasible means in many instances. But to hold it up as the ultimate way to minister is mis-guided. I have intentionally avoided going into biblical basis for each side because I believe both are supported and encouraged. But full-time ministers are important too.

In one of his books, Eugene Peterson talks about the "poised harpooner." His metaphor is a chase boat from the whaling days where he describes the frantic rowing of the crew as they chase down a whale. The frantic rowing is contrasted by the lone harpooner who calmly waits for the moment to strike. Peterson points out that to do his job of guiding the skiff as it follows a whale and then throwing the harpoon effectively the harpooner cannot be frantically rowing too. If he was, they wouldn't know which direction to row, and if they did happen to run into a whale no one would be in condition to make an accurate throw.

I think in the rush to support bi-vocational ministry we forget this crucial aspect of the full-timers. This is especially sad when the decision is based on, not really a lack of finances, but, simply the fact that the congregation begrudges paying the pastor. That speaks more about a spiritual condition than a financial one.

Let me make clear that I hold many bi-vocational pastors in high regard. I think they are doing the right think for their context and I think that will be the case in the future. If I felt God wanted me to do it too I wouldn't hesitate for a minute. But I am perfectly at peace with being a full-time minister and I think we need to be sure that it maintains it's standing has a legitimate form of ministry too.

Evaluating Church

It is that time of year again, to fill out annual reports on my church and send them in to the denomination. Every year I wonder what all those numbers really mean. Sometimes I think whoever reads my reports (Ha Ha) will get the absolute opposite impression than I have of my church. Sometimes the numbers will look good but because I know the story behind them I know they really aren't. And sometimes the numbers will look not so good and I will be excited about how things are going.

At any rate, evaluating church is always a big topic for discussion. I don't remember who the quote is originally attributed to but it states, "What gets measured, gets done." I could rewrite the last half a number of ways, ("What gets measured, gets fudged.") but the point is that there seems to be a consensus that we must have a way of measuring our effectiveness. I think there is truth in that but I seriously question what exactly we should measure.

Reggie McNeal talks about changing the scorecard, meaning that we need to start measuring the right things. I agree but I have a tendency to not stop until I have reached the ultimate end of the means. That leaves me with the question of how we have impacted the world around us. So really we should be measuring things like crime statistics, education levels, divorce rates, and the like. Seems like that would tell us something about how we are doing as a church. Can you imagine if those were the numbers every church had to supply in their annual reports? I bet there would be a lot more collaboration.

But then I thought I should look at the Bible and see what it has to say about evaluating churches. Novel idea, huh? There are a few times when numbers are used. The 2nd chapter of Acts is a prime example. We also read quite a bit about producing fruit and the fruit of the Spirit. Of course some of that is personal and may not necessarily refer to a church. However, there is one passage where God evaluates churches so that is where I camped out.

In the book of Revelation the 2nd and 3rd chapters give us God's evaluation of 7 churches. I listed all the positive things God had to say, all the negative things he had to say, all the admonitions, and all the words of encouragement. I came up with 4 areas that God seems to really care about when evaluating a church. The first one that comes through loud and clear is love. He comes down very hard on the Ephesian church for having lost it's first love. In the book of Ephesians Paul tells us that this church had a great love for God and a great love for others (1:15,16), so it seems that must be the first love that they lost. God cares if a church has a true love for God and others.

The second is faithful perseverance. Some of the churches seem to be going through very difficult times. They were probably churches that we would be quick to write off today. God even calls one of them weak. But they are praised for their faithful perseverance. Faithfulness gets a bad rap today because it can easily be used as an excuse for laziness or ineffectiveness. But my guess is faithful perseverance will become even more difficult in the days ahead.

The third is purity/spiritual vitality. Maybe I shouldn't lump these two together but I wanted to keep the list short. Purity isn't highly regarded today as it used to be but God seems to take it very seriously. Robert Bork used the phrase "slouching towards Gomorrah" and I think that pretty accurately describes a lot of what goes on in churches today. It is incredible how much the Bible is interpreted based on what we humans want it to say. I give a lot of latitude with various interpretations of events described in the Scripture but not when there is a direct moral command regarding faith and practice. Sorry but that is too risky. God wants purity.

He also condemns churches for being dead or luke-warm. I put this one under purity but maybe it should stand on its own. It seems to go along with love. God wants people who are passionate about their love for him and for others. Passionate people seem much more likely to remain faithful and to persevere. So is our church alive?

The fourth area that God evaluates is service and hard work. Again, I threw these two together but they could easily be separated. In this day and age this seems to address the social gospel issue. There is a long history behind the social gospel story but it is really both. God cares about our purity, faithfulness, and love for him, but he also cares about our compassion and service to others. We need to work hard at our service rather than just jump in when it is convenient. We have an obligation to do so as good citizens of the Kingdom.

So there you have it. If you a really want to evaluate your church ask yourself these 4 (or 5 or 6) questions and see how you do. Now if I can just think of a way to quantify it so I can send in the numbers. Do you think my denomination will be amused if I send in Likert scores for each of these areas?