Hip Gnosis

Secret knowledge. Hidden wisdom. Keys to enlightenment.

From the first century to the 21st, there's been a stream of these ideas bubbling underneath popular culture and mainstream religion. Rarely with big box-office popularity ("Rocky"), but with more of a devoted cult following ("Rocky Horror").

And, if you run with a certain crowd that values the esoteric and obscure just because they are esoteric and obscure, a good working knowledge of Gnostic literature adds to one's hipness quotient. If you can quote from the Gospel of Thomas or Judas and converse about it for a few minutes, your literati coolness factor goes way up. (I've read them, by the way. Not in the original Coptic, but still - I'm hip.)

I want to talk about the ancient Gnostics and where they are alive and well today in mainstream America, but you might not recognize them right away. But before I get there (maybe in part 2 of this post, as I think about it...), let's consider just for a bit the concept of Gnosticism and how it actually works out in real life situations.

First, gnosis is just the Greek word for knowledge.

Gnosticism is the notion that knowledge leads one to ... oh, pick one: self-fulfillment, higher consciousness, connection with the divine spark within, the next stage in evolution, transcendence... and so the pursuit of knowledge becomes the highest purpose for humankind. The more knowledge, the more advancement, etc.

Secret or hidden knowledge is more highly prized in this arena because it isn't as easily accessed or understood as is mainstream "popular" wisdom. And obviously if what *everyone* knows was good enough, we wouldn't have all the problems we have today, right? So... there must be other wisdom that less people know, and the less people that know it, the further from the mainstream and therefore the more valuable it probably is.

Okay, with that as backdrop, let me shift gears a minute and talk about the way our personalities work. I'll start by using another Greek word, psuche, most often translated as "soul" in the New Testament. We know almost instinctively that body and soul are separate, that the body stops at death, but the soul doesn't necessarily stop, depending on your view of the afterlife.

I'll show later (I think) that one's soul and one's spirit are not synonymous either. For now, let's say that the spirit is that part of us that is innately searching for some kind of meaning in life, some connection with eternity or with something greater than us.

So I think of a person as being in three parts, body, soul and spirit. I'll leave out the body and spirit parts of this discussion for now. For simplicity's sake let me equate the soul to that part of us that goes on into the next life, however you want to think of that, as well as what makes us who we are in this life - our personality.

It seems that the personality or soul is also made up of three parts: reason, emotion and volition. Said in other words: mind, heart and will. We sometimes refer to the will as "drive" or "strength of character" or "inner strength". The collective operation of those parts makes us who we are as human beings. It reminds me of the Great Commandment: to love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, strength. In other words, with all of who you are.

Life is lived experientially, not theoretically. So, when we go through our days, we gather information and encounter stimuli. The information and stimuli come in through a sort of experience funnel where they interact with our emotions and our reason. We think about some of the stuff and have emotional reactions to some of the stuff. Both our mind and our heart then inform our will. Our reason and our emotions move upon the will until we make a volitional choice to act or not act in some way.

Once we make a choice to act (or not), it comes out the bottom of the funnel, and then we begin to experience the outcome of that decision as it ripples into our daily life. The consequences go back into the top of the funnel as information to think about or stimuli to react to, and the process continues. It's a feedback loop of sorts, supplemented by additional experiences (related or unrelated) that happen continuously to us or around us.

Sometimes this feedback happens instantaneously, as in getting involved a parking lot fender-bender, deciding to jump out and holler at the other person, and then deciding NOT to retaliate after they've just hit you, but apologize instead. Or... any one of a dozen other permutations of that incident.

Other times the feedback loop is loooooong. Like reluctantly moving to take a new job and then finding after a year that it's not a good fit for you, and then deciding to return the recruiter's phone call this time when she calls, which several months later leads to a better job than you could have ever imagined would come your way 2 years earlier. It even moves you back sort of where you came from. Or something like that. Maybe. If you're lucky.

Now, I don't think that reason ever informs the emotions very much, or vice versa. I don't think they communicate much at all, except through the consequence feedback loop described above. They are like Mars and Venus, Cats and Dogs, Spaghetti and Waffles, Men and... well, you get my meaning. When's the last time your anger or lust or grief helped you slow down and think straight? When's the last time that thinking sensibly about the quality of your presentation in front of the Board of Directors made your palms stop sweating? They don't really help each other much.

So, if we get more knowledge, are we really any better off on a day to day basis, if we don't also give equal time to expanding our emotional capacity and range of emotional experience? *Some* people think we are. They are the modern-day Gnostics. More on who they are in the next part.

Oh, they have counterparts, too - people who think that getting in touch with and working out our feelings is the most important thing we can do to be better human beings. I'll identify them in the next part, too. Maybe you already know who these folks are. :) Hint: they're all certified and credentialed in their various fields. Or... they're wanna-bes who have cocktail-party theories (or blog posts!) to share with whomever will listen. ;)

You get what you pay for

And since I paid nothing for the flu shot this season... that's about what I got for it!

Since the wee hours of Thursday morning until mid-day Saturday I've been useless because of this nasty flu thing that's making it's way around. Finally today I feel like I can think, and so am back at the books again. 1&2 Corinthians this week. Not exactly simple reading.

Hm. It must be air travel that allows it to sprout almost simultaneously in the Midwest and in New England.

I've always thought, though, that the flu shot doesn't really *prevent* the flu, but it makes it harder to catch, and if you do catch it, the severity of the illness is less. Boy, if this was less severe than normal.. I really feel bad for all of you who got this thing without benefit of the shot. Yikes!

So, while I still feel like I lost in a bar fight, I only missed one evening of study, and by the end of Sunday should be caught up, I hope. In the meantime, as Paul says, I press on toward the prize...

Modern-day Cynic Philosophers?

This week in my online class we studied Paul's letters to Thessalonica. I'll spare you the intricacies of controversies over the dating, authorship, provence and literary style of the books. Yawn. Give me content over style any time. Well... maybe most of the time. Style can be pretty compelling, too - but it has to be really great to overcome mediocre substance. It's the reason I always judge a good song not just by the rhythm and vocal performance, but by the quality of the melody, the substance of the lyrics and the appropriateness of the chord structure and arrangement to set off both.

Wow. Half a dozen sentences and I'm already off subject. And this is just the intro... Do I never NOT have an opinion on something? Hmm. Don't answer that.

So, in 1 Thessalonians (which I think was written second, but never mind) Paul goes into this lengthy defence of his ministry, showing how he worked hard for his living, didn't live off the charity of his listeners, conducted himself respectfully and was circumspect in his speech, etc. But... who said he wasn't? Who's criticizng him that he has to make such a defence? It's one of the mysteries of these letters - who was opposing Paul? He refers to false teachers coming in, and people claiming to have letters from him that he didn't write, but... who?

The commentators make a pretty good case that it was the itinerant philosophers of the day who made the rounds of the Greek city-states (and Thessalonica was pretty big for its day - 100,000 people) and made their living by either renting lecture halls and speaking there (the Sophists) or setting up on street corners or in the marketplace and spouting off to whomever would listen, *and* contribute (the Cynics). Since Paul didn't stay in town long, people may have been saying "ahh, he's just another one of those philosophers looking for an audience and never seeing anything through." So he defends himself and his motives, and reminds people how he behaved (honorably) and why he didn't stay (driven out of town by a mob of opposition.)

Alright. With that as background - here's the point of the post today. A contemporary of Paul, a Roman author and social critic named Lucius, in his dialogue "The Runaways", wrote about Sophists as lecture-circuit philosophers (like todays seminar leaders), with a critical eye toward their tendency to not live lives that matched their message. The Sophists were orators (motivational speakers?) who developed followings of paying disciples who wanted to learn the secrets of moving up in civic life. Cynics on the other hand, tended to preach austerity and detaching oneself from the social structures of the day (anarchists?) to live more simply, even sponging off others if necessary (I have an interesting pamphlet from some anarchists on "freecycling" that actually advocates shoplifting to live more simply!). Lucian zeroed in on the Cynics as being particularly hypocritical, saying this of them:

"There was a tendency of common laborers to leave their workbenches and pursue the luxury of life as a fake philosopher. Anyone could gain a following by donning the short tunic, wallet and staff of the Cynic philosopher and spouting a torrent of abusive language about humanity in general. With a group of paying disciples in place, it was then a short step to a life of public austerity but private luxury - a purse full of gold, a table full of delicacies, and a life full of promiscuous sex."

Hm. Sounds like the Punk rockers and Rap stars of our day. You don't need a ton of talent - that's not how you gain a following. You only need the brass to step up on a platform and spout abusive language, set rhythmically to something vaguely resembling music, scream wildly or perhaps move suggestively, oh and be sure to wear the "uniform". Black studded leather, piercings, black/red dyed hair and makeup, work boots, chains, etc. for the Punk, and basketball jersey, baseball cap with flat brim off center, lots of gold chains, baggy pants low on hips, etc. for the Rapper. You look the part, you pepper your lyrics with cursing invective, scream against the system or praise a life of crime and exploitation, break things in a rage or grab crotch in a frenzy, etc. - and you'll get a following. And eventually... some degree of wealth, fame, sex and a comfortable lifestyle.

So, are the Punkers and Rappers the fake philosophers, the dime-a-dozen sidewalk Cynics of our day, fooling the young mob into thinking they're sincere when all they want is the comfortable lifestyle that having a following promises? Maybe I have less of a problem with rap stars since they at least aren't hypocritical - they preach the lifestyle, AND live it. It's degrading and brutally hedonistic, but - they're honest about it. But the successful punk rocker lives a very different lifestyle from what their followers live, very inconsistent with the earth-friendly, simple-living, liberal, or anarchist literature you find available at their tables. (see post of 11/28 "Anarchists Knitting Mittens") They rail at the very system that helps them become wealthy and allows them to privately live the life of conspicuous consumption which they publicly condemn.

I think I prefer the alternative non-Punk semi-folky or ethereal music of the day right now (either that or dance/house/electronica with no lyrics to interfere with the fun.) Better musicianship, and kinder, gentler lyrics that connect across generations (timeless stuff about love & loss, dreams & hurts, you know?) Why pay money to listen to either fake rage or unabashed self-indulgence?

You go, Lucius. You had it right 2000 years ago. Anybody with enough guts and little or no shame can get himself a following. There's always someone to fool. And so did Solomon have it right 3000 years ago: There *is* nothing new under the sun.

Caution! Narrow on the right...

The left has accused the right, especially the religious right, of being narrow-minded and focused on a few lightning-rod issues that they use as a litmus test for political candidates. They've also accused the religious right of co-opting the terms "family values" and "moral issues", using them as code words for their two big hot buttons of homosexuality and abortion (which, in their opinion, the right cannot see past.)

Now while the left is not at all immune from focusing on single issues (often the very same ones, just seen from the other side), and is full of fring-ey groups which certainly have their own set of litmus tests for politicians and which they apply, shall we say, religiously... they do raise a point which has troubled me more and more over the last 2+ years.

Why is it that, as Evangelicals, we are often every bit as narrowly focused as they say?

(note the use of we - I haven't left the camp, though I'm certainly out on the perimeter of it, looking around at things and thinking...)

We seem to focus on issues that relate to *individual* moral choices, rather than *collective* moral choices made by the community (be it society, government, the marketplace, etc.)

Why? Are the choices we make as groups of any less moral import?

We seem to focus on issues that impinge on a "traditional" definition of family (Dad, Mom, 2.3 kids, dog, white picket fence, suburbs...) and marriage (one man, one woman, for life, hearts and flowers, pipe and slippers, single breadwinner), even though these things are decidedly Western and Northern in flavor, and don't align with either urban post-modern or poor third-world or Eastern (Middle- or Far-) cultural realities.

Why? Do those definitions of marriage and family encompass the lives of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, or the Hebrews wandering the desert, or David, or Solomon, or Jesus, or Paul, or the Greek and Roman cultures in which he evangelised? Or are we really only interested in a North American pre-1960's marriage/family culture?

Are we that insular, that parochial? Are we that uncomfortable with people who disagree with us, and that disinterested in cultures different from ours?

Thinking back to the examples of both Jesus and Paul, there is ample teaching and precedent for us to be both open to and interested in mingling with those decidedly UNlike us, even hostile to us. Not to mention reaching out to those in the worst of conditions, regardless of the state of their hearts.

What's happened to change that? Why don't we reach out as God commanded?

What did Jesus say? Something about "what you do to the least of these, you do to Me"?

Moses, Isaiah, Jesus, James all talked about clothing the naked, feeding the hungry, tending the sick and imprisioned, as being tangible ways that we express our faith. And these are only some among many such social causes listed in Isaiah 58, which we often associate with Liberalism today.

Where is the Evangelical community on the long list of so-called "liberal issues", such as care for the environment, easing poverty and hunger, curing disease (esp. AIDS), restraining corporate greed and political corruption, giving the disenfranchised (of every stripe) a level playing field, and so on and so on?

Too often we are conspicuous in our absence, whether it's because we are hiding fearfully in our cloisters, working overtime manufacturing gospel literature, or carrying signs reminding everyone of what God hates.

I'm embarrassed sometimes to wear the Evangelical label, and am tempted to take off the red/white/blue logo-ed blazer altogether. (except that it's tradition, and goes so nicely with my white belt and deck shoes...)

And, if one happens to be (gasp!) a Calvinist, the predicament is even worse. Because, really - shouldn't the dyed-in-the-wool Calvinists be the most compassionate people on the face of the earth, to one and all, regardless of spiritual condition? Yet, we're not.

I mean, if you truly believe that salvation is a combination of God's sovereign unconditional election, His irresistable grace and ability to preserve His saints, why then... whom do we have to fear? Or convert, for that matter?

We can trust that God *will* save those he has marked ahead of time, and we can then indiscriminately shower His love and compassion on anybody and everybody without having to "target" people who might be salvation material, and avoid those who are obviously too hostile or contagious to attempt rescue.

We can simply love as God loves, and do as Jesus said: "love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?"

And dare I add, "do not even liberals do the same?"

So why don't we, who more than anyone understand the concepts of mercy and grace, exercise them toward others as God does to us, even when we are so terribly ungrateful and undeserving?

It's about time I got around to it myself.

Suffering for God's purpose?

This week's assignments in my online seminary class (NT102 Emergence of the Church) were the books of James and Galatians, both favorites of mine.

The book of Galatians has long been one in large part because of Paul’s unusual candor and the urgency with which he writes. He seems to drop all letter-writing convention and the niceties of personal interaction in a frenzied attempt to get his point across to the Galatians – and fast! It has much the same tone that I have found myself using when correcting some particularly foolish behavior in a child of mine. “Honestly! What were you thinking?” I might say. “Don’t you understand that you could have gotten hurt or killed? I can’t believe you did this! What friends were you with? Whose idea was it?” It’s that tone that Paul uses with the Galatians. He can’t believe that any child of his would be so foolish. It’s no wonder that his harshest criticism and most blunt language is reserved for those who were leading his “children in the faith”, as it were, astray.

But what is he so upset over? What is so great a threat to their faith? Nothing other than a teaching that, if true, would render his own faith in vain, not to mention all his work. Namely, that Christ’s sacrifice was for nothing. (2:21, 4:11)

Note: those of you not interested in the theological details... skip the next two paragraphs. :)

Some people, likely outsiders to the local churches, had come and were preaching the need for Gentiles to come under the requirements of the Torah to be saved, to become in essence Jewish proselytes – observant and under the law. And Paul’s harsh reaction to that is because it implies that the work of Christ is not, in and of itself, sufficient for salvation. And for the law to continue to be necessary, also implies that Christ did not in fact fulfill the law as He said He would. (Matt. 5:17-18) For if Christ fulfilled the law, as no other man could, then it no longer is a necessary means to communion with God, but Jesus Christ now stands in that place of atonement and reconciliation with God for us, and communion with God comes through Jesus. To add any requirement to that is to detract from the work of Christ, to render it incomplete and imperfect.

Carson & Moo, Thielman, and Polhill all go into depth on this issue, and cover essentially the same ground, including discussions of contemporary scholarship on Paul that emphasize the idea of “covenant nomism” rather than harsh Pharisaical legalism as the characteristic form of Judaism in Paul’s day. This school of thought on Paul does a better job of reconciling the OT’s emphasis on grace in His covenant relationship with Abraham & Israel to the grace now being shown to the Gentiles in the NT, and is consistent with Paul’s references to the Abrahamic covenant in 3:5-18. The law is seen not as a mechanism of salvation, but as a means of informing us of both our sin and our need for a Messiah to fulfill the law for us.

Whew! That was a lot to squeeze into two paragraphs. And there's almost as much in the next bunch, so if you want to just jump to the conclusion - skip three this time. :)

While this is all interesting, what gripped me personally the most about my reading of Galatians was not covered anywhere in the companion texts. Yet it points to Paul’s high view of God’s sovereignty in the exercise of His grace toward us. In Galatians 1:13-17, Paul is discussing his call to ministry and says several interesting things that I had not noticed before, or at least had not connected in the same way before this. One is that he was set apart by God for his ministry to the Gentiles “from the womb”. Another is that he was called (by revelation on the Damascus road) “when it pleased God” to do so. Putting these two together, it seems clear that God allowed Paul to be steeped in Pharisaical Judaism for years before being called, and even allowed Paul to spend time persecuting the church, which persecution presumably included sending believers to prison and death. He allowed Paul to make martyrs of His people for a time. Why?

Could not God have chosen to intervene in Paul’s life before he martyred God’s people? Imagine the impact that spending time with Jesus, while still in His earthly ministry, might have had on Paul. He could have been a secret follower of Christ as was Joseph of Arimathaea. And yet, God, always zealous for the glory of His name, had other things in mind. For in 1: 23-24, we see the result of Paul’s conversion coming when it did, after he persecuted the church. It resulted in glorifying God. And would it have resulted in that same degree of glory to God if God had not allowed Paul to establish his reputation as one who persecuted the church? Look at how many times Paul went back to that concept in his public testimonies and private correspondence. God definitely used the time of Paul persecuting the church to increase the wonder and praise given to Him as a result of Paul’s conversion, not to mention the added authenticity lent to Paul’s testimony before men.

While we know God does not do evil, or initiate it (James 1:13-15), He definitely allows it for His own purposes. And in this case it seems that He allowed Paul to be trained as a Pharisee, which, coupled with his naturally zealous personality (which God also gave him), resulted in harsh treatment of God’s people. So the suffering of God’s people under the hand of Paul was for a greater purpose than no doubt any of them could see. Certainly at the time Paul’s hand was striking, it could never be guessed that God’s purpose in their suffering was to exalt His name through the later conversion of he who was persecuting them.

So... the point?

This serves as a reminder to us that we can never really know the purposes behind our suffering, and it calls us to faith in God’s greater plan for both us, and others who may benefit because we suffered. This is faith – that God’s intentions for His people are always good, even if He permits our suffering to accomplish that good. It also proves in Paul’s own life (by both the suffering he caused others and, ironically, what he suffered for the Gospel himself) the thing that Paul so often stressed – that God is sovereign in the application of His grace, and we are not to question the hand of the potter in how he molds the clay – or even how he destroys it.

Let the author of this post pay attention.

A mistake?

Just as I thought the edge was dulling on the tension I felt at work, here comes more. PeBo is suggesting now that I should impose time tracking on my staff to see what they're doing all day. And my peers on PeBo's staff are suggesting that my people don't have the skills or desire needed to do their jobs, which would explain why they might be working on the wrong things. And after 6 months of working with them and observing, I think they're right. So our next staff meeting will be spent talking about how we can work around my folks to get things done faster!

And here I thought I had come here to be a consultant to my part of the company, build a staff of consultants to help them understand the financial impacts of their actions, and communicate it with the rest of the place. Instead, for the last several months we've been neck deep in reengineering the business process of handling data and reports, and it looks like for the *next* several months I'll be doing little else but trying to either retrain or get rid of my staff, most of which were handed to me by other managers, including my two bosses!

Somehow this is a different job than the one I was hired to do a year ago. Feels like a big mistake. But then, maybe all it's only what Solomon was talking about in Ecclesiastes 9:11, when he said: "... The race is not to the swift, Nor the battle to the strong, Nor bread to the wise, Nor riches to men of understanding, Nor favor to men of skill; But time and chance happen to them all."

At least time seems to be flying by. All the studying for grad school (or seminary - however you want to refer to it) is forcing me to concentrate on something else for a significant chunk of my spare time, so I don't dwell on the office overmuch. It's the 3rd week of class tonight. Already!

This week the topic was the run up of Saul's kingship, and all his boneheaded mistakes. What poor judgment! Or maybe they were mistakes, not of judgment, but of a rebellious heart. Or maybe they were motivated by personal greed or false pride or poor self-image. Or maybe they were results of a general carelessness caused by simply not taking God seriously. And as a consequence - he loses all he gained, and winds up worse off than before God called him.

Gee... I'm intimately familiar with all those types of mistakes. Does that mean I'm wired like Saul? I always thought I was wired more like David, or like Solomon. Hm. I wonder if they were INTJs/ENTJs. :)

Of course, David made all those same kinds of mistakes, too - and *he* was a man after God's own heart. While those mistakes cost him, the setbacks were temporary, and he continued to have God's favor. What was the difference? One obvious difference was that Saul was never broken in spirit before God like David was, crying out with all his heart for God's mercy. The one time Saul asked for God's forgiveness, it was so that he could continue to look good in the eyes of the people. That was never David's motivation - David's heart broke over his own wretchedness.

As does mine.

And like David, I know that God's mercy is my only hope and my greatest need, in this life - and the next.

Who is my neighbor?

Yesterday I finished watching an interview of U2's Bono by Bill Hybels of Willow Creek Church (Barrington Heights, IL). They were talking about the effects of poverty and the AIDS pandemic on Africa. It was fascinating on several levels, but one in particular, given a conversation I also had over coffee with someone about cell phone, internet and GPS technology. The sum of the two gave a new meaning to Jesus's parable of the Good Samaritan.

What's the connection?

It's this: the definition of "my neighbor" has changed in the last 20 years. And I almost missed it.

Willow Creek Church is a mega-church in an affluent Chicago suburb. They have leadership training programs for Evangelical (and other) pastors from all over the country. At a 2006 conference, which 70,000 pastors and church leaders attended, Hybels presented an interview he did with Bono to make these leaders aware of, as he put it, "the single greatest humanitarian challenge of our time." Bono is devoting his considerable star power (which he calls "currency") to make people aware of the need in Africa, and with the help of internet technology, he's succeeding.

See www.one.org for details.

At one point in the interview, Hybels asked Bono "why are the churches late to the party when it comes to helping?" One of the charges Bono leveled against the Evangelical church in particular was their tendency to take a "hands-off" approach to AIDS because of the moral implications of the disease. Maybe they have it coming, you know? Actions have consequences. But he used a powerful analogy to defuse this argument. Let's assume that you were the only car driving along a rural road and you come upon an accident. You stop and find the driver, alone, half out of the car, very seriously injured, smell a strong scent of alcohol, and see an empty whisky bottle on the seat. Do you say "tsk, tsk, he had it coming", and drive off, leaving him to suffer what were very likely the direct consequences of his actions? Of course not! You stop and help, you call 911, you stay there until someone comes. It doesn't matter if he was at fault - he needs help. So with the AIDS crisis. Those people need help, too.

In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus expects us to help when we see our neighbor in need. But who is our neighbor? I always thought of it as "the people God sends across my path" or "people in need, who 1) I'm aware of, and 2) whose need I can actually do something about." Either way - when a person with a need crosses my field of vision, and I can do something - Jesus expects that I will. But, what if that someone is... waaaaaay over *there*? It's a big world out there, you know.

Well, guess what? The world is smaller than it used to be. This next example drove that point home.

A woman from my church was telling me over coffee how much she loves her GPS device in her car - wherever she is it will point her toward home. She raves about it to all her friends, and she never has to ask for directions. She told me that one time a friend of hers in Texas called her on her cell phone from her car, and begged her for help. She was lost, and needed directions and had no GPS device. Awww... :) Well, this lady sat down at her PC, pulled up Google maps, entered the friend's cross streets from where she was calling, and the destination address. She told her "I've got you! Drive straight for half a mile, then turn left and then take your next right..."

So, from 1500 miles away, thanks to cellular phone, internet and GPS mapping technology, one person could reach out and help another in need. Hi neighbor! Small world... If they both had the newest in video-capable phones, one could even see the other waving. ;)

Now, extend the example to YouTube, cellphones with video capability, instant transfer of information over email, instant transfer of funds via PayPal, anywhere in the world. All of a sudden, a poor local church in Uganda can work with a rich local church in Barrington Heights and can 1) let them see and hear, in near-real time, the faces and voices of children orphaned by AIDS, describe their needs in detail with an virtually instant email transmission, and receive from the rich church funds transferred electronically the same day.

NONE of this was possible 20 years ago, 15 years ago. Much of it has become possible only in the last 3-4 years. The world is shrinking before our eyes.

And all of a sudden...

who exactly IS my neighbor?

The Rabbi's Study

Note to all those faithful readers who are seeing a trend in this blog toward all things theological: you're right. Like any sensualist (hopefully in a positive sense, as in:),

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=325730

I react to stimuli around me, until it becomes routine and I don't notice it anymore. But for the time being, since I'm pouring myself into this new grad school routine... it's definitely generating new stimuli. This, too, shall pass. :)

What hasn't passed is a long-standing romantic notion that I would love to be a Rabbi. Not in a pastoral sense - I don't have a shepherd's heart. Dumb sheep. Fend for yourselves. :) But I do have a teacher's heart. Give me eager faces, willing minds, and I'll gladly impart what I know (and even make up some stuff I don't know, right on the spot!)

The picture at the top is of one of the shelves in my study (read: 3rd bedroom that is not set aside for the kids when they come visit.) There's the replica of the Ark of the Covenant, the shofar which I blow at the holy days (and now and then to scare a small child), the books of Josephus, and Edersheim's classic treatise, plus a variety of devotional and topical books... just a small sampling of the haphazard mingling of content and clutter that is my space.

I have been so nervous about this grad school thing - am I over my head with all these scholars? But last night in class, I got my second "atta boy" from the prof. :) We were going through the text and commentaries, and I remembered an insight I picked up during study earlier this week about something in I Samuel 4 vis-a-vis a reference the professor made to ch. 3.

I cleared my throat and dove in, and the prof made me repeat myself - twice! I was nervous and thought he was going to criticize me for having such a dumb idea, but he said with a tone of wonder: "I've never seen that before! All the years of studying this book and it never occurred to me... how do you spell your last name again? You are getting credit in a footnote in the commentary I'm writing on this. Remarkable..." he said, shaking his head.

Woohoo! I felt so much better after that about fitting in to the class (and the program) here. Me, a footnote in a commentary after only my second class! Maybe he meant it was remarkable that an insight like that would come from such an uneducated rube as me. :)

Mmmm, I can hear it now: "Excuse me Rabbi, can you tell me... is there a proper blessing for the government?" And all of you who have seen "Fiddler On The Roof" know the answer to that one. :)

A Benevolent God?

Last fall, a USA Today Survey showed that one's view of God influences their political leanings and ideology more than any other factor, including party affiliation or even denominational one.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2006-09-11-religion-survey_x.htm?csp=34

The views are titled A, B, C and D, standing for Authoritarian, Benevolent, Critical and Distant. The third one is a little confusing. It's not actively critical, as in identifying and intervening into unacceptable behhavior, but more like an art or literary or drama or music critic - observing human behavior (and having known opinions), just passively. But it makes for a nice C-word to continue the labeling scheme. :)

I remember having discussions with people about this article when it came out, including one person whose view of God was "some of both of the first two" - Authoritarian and Benevolent. That person happened to be Catholic, and since then I've talked to other Catholics who seem to see things the same way. Not coming from that background, I don't follow how this comes about, but it seems to be even within the Trinity itself that this dichotomy exists.

This week, at seminary, there was a guest speaker who came in to talk with "the kids" (read the students - most of whom are north of 35...) on the occasion of a new quarter starting. She spent some time talking about her Catholic upbringing, and put it this way: "I was scared of God The Father, always feeling He was angry with me. He never seemed either loving or approachable. Jesus on the other hand was always approachable, loving and merciful. I had no problem praying to Him, meditating on His words. The Holy Spirit? He was just smoke and mirrors to me. Mostly smoke. You know, all that incense and so forth. He was in there somewhere, in that smoke, that much I knew." It was kind of humorous to listen to her, but I knew hers wasn't an isolated experience. Others have said similar things. Hm.

Me, I'm squarely in the B camp. I get my idea of an essentially benevolent God the Father, one characterized by lovingkindness and mercy (yet not without concern for satisfying the needs of justice), from both Old Testament AND the New. Even in the Torah, in the books of the law, it's clear how God describes himself to Moses, here in Exodus 34:6-7, from the NKJV:

And the LORD passed before him and proclaimed, “The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children to the third and the fourth generation.”

This Sunday the key verse for the day in church was Titus 3:4-7, which is, interestingly, also one of the few passages in Scripture that explicitly gives us a look at the concept of the Trinity, here from the NIV:

But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life.

The kindness and love of God (the Father) is poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ (the Son), by the Holy Spirit (who facilitates the rebirth and renewal that happens with that forgiveness). Even the demands of justice were also satisfied through the death of Jesus, which God the Father ordained - for our benefit. Sure sounds benevolent to me (benevolent toward mankind, anyway). And I didn't have to do a darned thing to merit that benevolence; couldn't, even if I wanted to. It's all by His grace.

Reminds me of a little song I sang for years at Bible camp. (Not the Jesus Camp of the recent film with the same title, by the way - nothing nearly that militant). It went like this:



He paid a debt he did not owe.
I owed a debt I could not pay.
I needed someone to wash my sins away.

doo bee doo bee doo
(yes, we really sang that part)

And now I sing a brand new song:
"Amazing Grace", the whole day long.
Christ Jesus paid the debt that I could never pay.


So...

what?

Well, a lot, that's what! It's the main reason I go through life making mistakes and failing routinely, but don't get crippled by guilt. God knows I'm not worthy of forgiveness, not even close. But I don't have to be, either. He's merciful and gracious. He forgives, not because of who I am, but because of who He is.

Hang the sense of it

Wrapping up the last of my Sr. High class on Wisdom this weekend and next, I've had a heightened awareness of ancient wisdom showing up in modern culture. The latest example of this was last night, sitting on the couch, eating pizza (meat lovers... mmmm), and watching "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy". Not exactly where you'd expect to see wisdom show up. It's a fun movie, so very droll and British. Plus, yet another example of a rapper turned movie actor, this time "Mos Def". They all seem, to a person, very approachable on screen, and quite unlike their persona on the rap stage. That would make a good feature article in People or even Time...

Now where was I?

Oh. Right. There's this scene where Arthur Dent, the male lead, the clueless and cowardly rural Brit, is being given a tour of the universe's "factory floor" by some guy who helps build planets to spec for whoever it is that orders these things. Oh, yeah - it's mice. That's right. Mice run the universe. Well, anyway, our hero is trying to make sense of all this, and the planet builder guy says to him:

"The chances of finding out what's really going on are so absurdly remote that the only thing to do is say 'Hang the sense of it!' and keep yourself busy. Besides, I'd rather be happy than right, wouldn't you?"

Gosh, that sounds like Ecclesiastes to me, especially chapter 3:11-12 and 5:18-20, which are kind of the "don't worry, be happy" passages of the Old Testament, just as Matthew 6:25-34 are the New Testament's version of the same. I love to see ancient wisdom sprinkled, even haphazardly, into pop culture. It's a testimony to the staying power of a really good concept. And it should endure, right? It's God's concept, after all.

Ha - and you thought it was original with Bobby McFerrin.

Hit the books, boy...

Reading, reading, reading...

3 hours a night so far and nowhere near done with this week's assignments yet. Oof. It's been a while since I've read dense material like this, not to mention reading other than for recreation.

Some of the commentaries on and scholarly treatments of these sections of the Bible have stuff in them that I would put in the category of "angels dancing on the head of a pin" - nits to pick. What difference does it really make if Paul got his orientation to Pharisee-ism at home in Tarsus or under Gamaliel's teaching in Jerusalem. He eventually repudiated it, so... who cares? But scholars love to debate this stuff. Oy Gevalt! God forbid I should be that kind of scholar!

On the other hand, some of the information is pretty interesting, like the Greek authors Paul quotes from in his arguments, and the military structures, politial systems, or the sporting events of the day which Paul often uses as examples and analogies. That stuff I like, and find interesting and useful to add texture to what he taught. Hopefully there will be enough of the latter to keep me reading faithfully, because the course outcome appears to be dependent on it. I repeat... oof!

First on site class tomorrow night, plus an orientation & welcome dinner. I'm nervous and excited, and determined not to think at all about fitting in. Not me. :) But, what should I wear? ;)

Goodness of fit test

Well, that was... not what I expected.

Yesterday I had the heart-heart talk with PeBo (see post of 12/15/06) about his expectations and my ability to deliver on them, as well as my fit for the role, etc.

What I expected was to be out on my keyster, with a foot imprint on it to boot.

What I got was an active listener (too active - I had to constantly steer him back to my prepared script!), with some genuine concern for my welfare. :)

When I talked about my Meyers-Briggs profile (INTJ/ENTJ), the jobs I have found to be a good fit in the past (advisor/strategist), the difference between a thinker (me) and a do-er (him), and the difference between a Nehemiah (what he wants) and an Ezra (what he's got - see post of 12/03/06), it made sense to him. And finally, when I told him I had signed up for grad school at a seminary, the light bulb really went on. In fact, he stopped the conversation and said "oh, my - a light bulb just went on! I get it now."

He offered to talk to Rug next week and see if there were other work options for me around here that might play more to my passions (principle, concept, strategy, planning, motivating, teaching, writing, performing.) We even brainstormed a few, one of which was to craft a role as leader of an effort to coordinate all the actuarial and financial training around the company. That has a certain appeal.

Now, I don't expect that something like that will just fall out of the sky in the next 2 weeks, but I do think I worried for nothing (which is normal for me), since he seemed to genuinely have my best interests at heart, and saw that there were other ways that I could contribute around here and have a better fit with my style, personality, interests.

I'm hopeful coming into the new year, that 2007 will be a better year than 2006, both work wise and personally.

Christmases, City and Rural

Christmas in the city is busy, bustling, exciting. People are a little happier than usual, a tad more friendly, but also more harried - they just carry it well. The city takes on a festive glow, the window lights softening the glare of streetlights and neon shop signs. It's business as usual, though - *more* than usual in some sectors, with part-timers brought on to handle the press of business at the holidays. The carols can be heartfelt, but they can also mean the difference between breaking even and a decent profit for the year. Parties are in full swing, the bar/restaurants are booked solid with groups of co-workers having some holiday cheer. It's busy, no doubt about it. When I hear this song, I can picture the scene:

Christmas makes you feel emotional
It may bring parties or thoughts devotional
Whatever happens or what may be,
Here is what Christmas time means to me.

City sidewalk, busy sidewalks
dressed in holiday style.
In the air there's
a feeling of Christmas.

Children laughing, people passing,
meeting smile after smile,
And on every street corner you'll hear:

Silver bells, silver bells,
It's Christmas time in the city.
Ring-a-ling, hear them ring,
soon it will be Christmas day.

City street lights,
even stop lights,
blink a bright red and green,
As the shoppers rush home
with their treasures.

Hear the snow crunch,
see the kids bunch,
This is Santa's big scene,
And above all this bustle you'll hear:

Silver bells, silver bells,
It's Christmas time in the city.
Ring-a-ling, hear them ring,
soon it will be Christmas day.

But in the country... it's different. The rookie cop pulls patrol on Christmas day, the fire house is down to a skeleton crew. The quick marts and gas stations are closed up along with the coffee shop and the shoe repair place. People are still nice, yes, but no more than they are all year 'round. It comes with the territory around here. But they're harder to find - they're home with family, eating, drinking, playing Sheepshead or Pinochle or Euchre, drinking some more, and watching football on TV. Or... they're at church.

Last night after checking on the dog I drove from the cabin on the lake into town for the Christmas Eve candlelight service, and the little country church that I pass on the way had a parking lot full of cars. I'd never seen more than one there before this, but with the parking lot full, the church lit from within, and the light shining *out* through the stained glass, it seemed so warm and cozy - and quiet. You could almost hear the assembled multitude of friends, neighbors and extended families, all singing "Silent Night" acapella. Driving by, you got the feeling that this was the time of year where the stained glass wasn't for those inside the church, like it is on a Sunday morning - but for those passing by on a dark night, with no church of their own, no anchor for the season.

Still others are at the tavern with *their* extended "family" of fellow revelers, lifting their spirits a bit differently. The jukebox plays "Grandma Got Run Over By A Reindeer" to a rousing singalong on the chorus, good for a few knowing yuks afterwards. People know that songs like this fit them, here where snowmobiles run in the ditches beside the country two-lanes or cut across the fields marked as available for such cross-country transit. The comraderie is as vibrant, if not as focused on inner joy and the life to come. There are simpler pleasures out here where the deer and dogs run free but the rusting trucks in the backyard don't. The outside lighting displays are less the latest trend from Macy's (or even Target), and more from the traditions of the previous generation and what the new one has added slowly and respectfully over the years. There's less focus on change and more on continuity - of yard lights, and of family rituals.

So what's the right song for a rural Christmas? Maybe some combination of "White Christmas", "I'll Be Home For Christmas", and "The Christmas Song", all of which talk about things from our past that we want to remember - warm, happy, home-centric memories. But I like this one - I can see the country lane and the meadow and the snowman, can't you?

Sleigh bells ring, are you listening,

in the lane, snow is glistening.

A beautiful sight,we're happy tonight,

walking in a winter wonderland.

Gone away is the bluebird,

here to stay is a new bird

He sings a love song,as we go along,

walking in a winter wonderland.

In the meadow we can build a snowman,

Then pretend that he is Parson Brown

He'll say: Are you married? we'll say: No man,

But you can do the job when you're in town.

Later on, we'll conspire,

as we dream by the fire

To face unafraid,the plans that we've made,

walking in a winter wonderland.

It snowed a couple of days ago, and everything got covered in whiteness and a clean beauty. Waking up yesterday morning ago to snow covered branches and a glaze of ice on the lake, birds at the feeder, fire in the hearth... there's a lot to be said for Christmas way out here in the country.

Rocky Redux

After driving around looking at lights last night (such as they are in this little burg up north), J2 and I headed to the movie theatre to see "Rocky Balboa". A nice little outing for father and son.

The movie was a bit introspective (maybe that's Stallone as filmmaker looking at himself, who knows), but the fight scenes were still great, and we both liked the symmetry of the movie vis-a-vis the entire series. It closed a loop, sort of ended where it began.

And it was remarkable how in shape the guy was. He has the sagging skin of a 60 year old (I'm beginning to relate) but underneath that lack of youthful tautness, he was *built*, with enormous arms. Very little fat on the belly, although he was barrel-chested (as one gets over time, despite the best intentions.) The years were evident, but so was the remaining power.

I suppose it's romantic, sentimental, and even a little maudlin to insert oneself into the plot line. And who better than me to do such a thing? ;) One of the things Rocky said was that he still had "stuff inside" that needed to come out - he wasn't done yet - but had no way to express it. Hm. I liked that he found a way to flame out, and not sputter (see last pic in post of 11/28). You know, "old guy does good", that kind of thing.

I still have stuff inside, too, that needs to come out. I'm not done yet, either. So all I need, I guess, is a metaphorical ring to step into. Still looking for the right venue...

Home For Christmas?

I'm dreaming tonight of a place I love
even more than I usually do.
And though I know it's a long road back
I promise you

I'll be home for Christmas
You can plan on me.
Please have snow and mistletoe
And presents 'round the tree.

Christmas Eve will find me
Where the love-light gleams;
I'll be home for Christmas
If only in my dreams



I'm not sure about being "home for Christmas" this year - even if it's only in my dreams.

Where is home for me, again? Someone refresh my memory, please - I've forgotten. Show me where home is, would you? I'd like to go there right about now. I'm pretty sure I'll know it when I see it.

Oh boy, a heart to heart!

What did I just get myself into?

Just had my usual 1 on 1 with Pebo in which I told him what I was working on, and then he recapped how he thought things were going.

Following several well-placed criticisms of my staff (like I'm not already painfully aware of these things...) he did wrap up by saying that he and Rug agree that they are seeing much better behaviors from me, which I take to mean more evidence of being engaged, which is in turn derived from delivering more work products, or at least having a plan for same. So that's positive, I guess. I'm not sure I'm doing anything differently, though - it's just that stuff we've had in the queue for a while is getting finished. Hm.

Well, anyway, he had asked the time before how he could help me. I was prepared today to ask for a couple of things. First, could he be less directive and less blunt, more congenial? I had concrete examples that seemed to ring bells with him. So, maybe that will help me feel less intimidated, I don't know. Second, could we take some time after Christmas (we're both in the office between then and New Year's) to have a non-project related discussion about my personality type, work style and fit with his expectations for this current assignment I'm in.

He even agreed to do a little pre-reading for it! He loves to hand out things to read, and I will no doubt wow him by my comprehension of the latest business book he's given to all of us to read, "The Goal" by Eliyahu M. Goldratt. But I think he'll be surprised by my reaction to it - emotional, not intellectual. The intellectual conclusion of the book was obvious. The emotional impact unexpected. (that seems to be my pattern these days - unexpected emotional reactions to things)

So, he's going to read before the 27th some descriptions I gave him of the INTJ/ENTJ personality types (which I fluctuate between - depending on who I'm with and what I'm doing), and will also read the two short Biblical books of Ezra and Nehemiah, so I can relate to him the analogy I laid out in a prior post.

Boy, oh boy. This conversation should be a real corker. Pass the kleenex. Wish I was the one driving across the country with the dog for Christmas. I'd welcome the drive back alone to think and rehearse what I'll say. Instead I fly in and out - and talking to myself out loud on the airplane doesn't usually make the people around me very comfortable. Hope I can distract myself over the holidays and not dwell on this upcoming talk. At least it's scheduled for end of day, so that I can go home afterwards and perspire & shake in private. :)

Conflicting (or converging) Advice?

People are aware of both my job situation and my enrolling in grad school, and I'm getting two consistent streams of advice and counsel these days.

One thread is basically: "Bloom where you're planted. Buckle down and work hard. Give 100% - a day's work for a day's pay. Develop a good reputation. Trust in God and He will deliver you at the right time. Don't try to weasel out of a tough situation - learn whatever lesson is there for you to learn."

The other thread is more like: "Connect with your passions. Use the time you have left to make the biggest impact on those around you, leave a positive legacy behind you. It's never too late to change direction. This is the time of life where you can be free again to grow and change for the better. As long as you're energetic and healthy - follow your heart, trust God for the rest. What is your security in, anyway? Money isn't everything, you know."

So... is one thread of advice right and the other wrong?

Or, can I apply both at the same time somehow? Maybe so - I think the next 3-4 months will tell the tale. A quarter's worth of grad school, at the same time trying to improve things at work, looking at other career options in the meantime... who knows? Maybe I can learn something about myself and life while exploring a new direction for my remaining productive years, be that 5, 15, 25, or 50. Who knows how long?

Like Gandalf says to Frodo, when Frodo wishes out loud to be rid of his burden - wishes "that none of this had happened." Gandalf says to him: "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us."

Neither is it for me to decide how much productive time I have left. But what do I do with what I've been given? *How* do I spend it?

Nehemiah I'm not

Lately the sermons at church have been dovetailing with my personal life. And, while that's good, it's also unsettling! Especially so when it's work-related. As frustrating as that has been lately, I've tried to let it stay at the office when I leave, but now even the pastors won't let me!!! :) Hmmm. Ok, maybe it's not them that's pestering me. Maybe it's the One for whom they work.

So on Friday I'm sitting in PeBo's office for my weekly one-on-one with him, trying to keep the hair on the back of my neck down. He is blunt and directive from the start, which puts me immediately on edge, as if I weren't anxious enough already. But, the conversation actually goes pretty well and he ends by saying "I have no issues with you."

!!

How am I supposed to react to that? It almost felt like I was supposed to look at my shoes and say "thank you, kind sir." So I didn't say anything. Then he says: "how are WE doing, you and me?" and I sort of choke. That kind of question is way too multi-faceted to respond to without some thought, so as I'm thinking and looking at the window, he looks at his watch and says "well, you think about it. When we meet next I'd like you to tell me what I can do for you, tell me how I can help you."

Okay, then. Um... at least I have a chance to think about that for a another week. But what do I say? I do want to hang on to this job for a while...

So today I'm listening to the sermon and it seems sort of irrelevant (he was talking about expressing anger - although come to think of it, maybe it's not all *that* irrelevant), until the pastor uses Nehemiah as an example of how to deal with anger well. Then, my head starts to fill with ideas. Not about anger, but about Nehemiah, his contemporary, Ezra, and an analogy that might just fit...

A couple of weeks ago a department head in another area of the company told me "this company has a strong culture of rewarding people who get things done." Do-ers, in other words. Not thinkers, not persuaders, but do-ers.

I think that's what PeBo wants. A do-er. A take-charge guy who will take the long list of things PeBo wants done and do what it takes to make them happen. Seems to me that I am much more a thinker and a persuader than a doer. My most successful career role has been in positions that require intuitive thinking and persuading about what should happen next. I look for patterns in things and try to connect dots, connect ideas, explain why things are the way they are, and then persuade others to see the same thing, and then act on it. I connect people who are thinking similarly, or who need each other to avoid working on the same thing in parallel but at cross purposes.

What came to mind this morning is the difference between Nehemiah and Ezra. Both were involved in the rebuilding of Jerusalem after the Jews' Babylonian exile. But their roles were very different (though complementary) and their reactions to short-sighted behavior very different (though both effective.) If you read the OT books that bear their names, you get a composite picture.

Nehemiah was the skilled administrator and led by command. He was directive and unyielding in his approach to getting things done. He was critical when he needed to be, and gave pats on the back when appropriate. He lined up his resources, prepared a plan, executed it to a T. He lacked much compassion for failure, and harangued people to do what was necessary to accomplish what he knew was right.

Ezra was the visionary and teacher, who led by appealing to principle. He called the people to take the right path, explained to them what it was, and was broken-hearted over failure, publicly abasing himself as an example, taking their shame on himself. He appealed to their better nature, called them to a higher standard, motivated people not with a plan but with a vision and purpose.

PeBo wants a Nehemiah. I think I'm an Ezra.

Anarchists Knitting Mittens

The Saturday of Thanksgiving weekend J1 and I went on a tour of the downtown, including a gorgeous art deco building and the company HQ. While in the area, we stopped off at the First Annual Punk Rock Flea Market. It's kind of hard to describe the experience, but - you know of course that I'll try. ;)

It was in the basement of a neighborhood cultural center (made possible by the very government that the people at the anarchist literature table were pushing to tear down - I'm sure the irony was lost on the group.) and had about 15 tables selling both used and newly handmade stuff. I was the only person in the room over 30 and so got a few inquisitive looks, but also got involved in a couple of interesting and enthusiastic conversations.

I was fascinated as I riffed through the Punk and Hardcore music for sale (um... and what's the difference, again?), to find that so much was on vinyl. How long have these bands been around anyway? But then I realized... Hey! this is NEW vinyl! New! As in they just pressed the stuff this year. You must be kidding me...

So I asked a kid behind one table about it, expressed my amazement, and he said "Yeah, vinyl's cool. In fact, here... this one's an EP of my own band. I'm giving them out as promos - take one!" Promos, I said? That can't be cheap. Aren't CDs more economical? "Of course", he said, "but they're not as cool. And you guys were right, man, vinyl just sounds better! Plus, the cover art is waaaay better. It's like, you know, BIG! You can really see the detail in great graphics and stuff so much better that way. It's like, some of the old classic rock albums had really great artwork, too - you remember, right?"

Yeah, man, I remember - hey, I'm cool. I just... forgot for a while that I was. :)

Funny how things come around again. Like great vinyl LPs with cool cover art. I have some on my lounge wall right now. :) Classic stuff, dude. But it's not just happening in music. You look on furniture or clothing design websites and it's lots of 60's retro looks. That was a very hip time, innovative, edgy, cool. I think that's why I like my lounge so much - it's a modern take on old coolness.

And then there's philosophy. Some of the same concepts are coming around again there, too, just with a modern take. Anarchist literature for example... I read a fair amount of radical leftist power-to-the-people tear-down-the-government pamphlets in my late teens/early twenties. Feminists wanted sexual liberation and to destroy gender objectification, while the anarchists wanted liberation from the warmongers in Washington (as I recall, the Democrats began *that* war and Republicans were left to handle the withdrawal...) and to break down the military-industrial complex. Right on, brother!



Yet here, while the boys were selling used CDs (and new vinyl!), t-shirts, band posters, anarchist literature and vigorously discussing "the movement", the girls were selling vegan baked goods and home made crafts (cloth purses, decorative buttons, knitted mittens, Christmas (!) ornaments, notecards) and discussing so&so's new baby. Hmmm... so much for gender objectification.

It felt like I entered a time warp and I stepped into 1971. I'd been here before! Except back then the girls wore granny dresses and head scarves instead of layered t-shirts and goth makeup, and the boys were not dressed in studded black leather with half-gloves - it was work boots and loose-fitting poncho-style shirts with rawhide laces and fabric that felt like gunny sack material. And when it got damp it smelled like wet dog.

But everything else was the same. Kids passing out ideological literature (libertarianism, conservation, communism), discussion of "the movement" (be it back-to-the-earth, feminism, the Jesus movement - you could pick your movement), cool band posters and radical album cover art (remember the inside of Steppenwolf's "For Ladies Only"? Shocking!), and loads of home made crafts (macrame' hanging plant pot holders made from hemp) and nasty-tasting but healthy baked goods. Yikes! I've entered The Twilight Zone!

I shoulda saved all my copies of Mother Earth News. They would've gone over big. And! My Mr. Natural cartoons...
keep on truckin', mama - truck my blues awayyyyy. Far out!

Were we all that earnest in those days? Yeah, I think so. Everyone had a secret (or open) dream of going off the grid and doing a little organic farming with renewable energy, raising some chickens... and some friends actually did! Spent a weekend once at a Christian Commune... discovered I don't really like chickens. :) But, man, what *was* great was to be quietly zealous about an idea and think that you could actually maybe go off and live according to it! Hm. I miss that.

Time to do that again, maybe. I kind of liked these kids. I recognized them - and myself - from another time. I'd like to be zealous for a cause again. And the corporate profit motive isn't cutting it as a cause around which to unify and get people excited.

So, with some magnetic letters I got in Juxtapoz magazine (J1 pointed it out to me - now skater art is becoming collectable! who knew?), I posted this reminder to myself on my bookcase at the office.

For the last... oh... 6 years or so, I've felt like my flame is sputtering, here in corporate America. Not enough oxygen in this part of the world.

Maybe if I get to a place where I spend my time filling young minds with something other than a rigid ideology and teach them instead how to reason through, understand, and relate to people with, philosophies other than their own, I can see that flame burn bright again until one day it just goes POP! and then I wake up in a place filled with pure motives.

(sigh)

Wouldn't that be lovely? Almost like living the simple life on a little organic farmette somewhere off the grid - with no chickens.

What a nice weekend!

What with both kids home, their grandparents here, plus uncle/aunt/cousins, it seemed like a normal Thanksgiving. Feels now like the house has been broken in, and is official! Family's been here. :)

There was a boatload of traditional food (of course) plus a few new recipes, all of which were yummy this year - sometimes they're not! The lounge was a favorite destination for the introverts in the family to sneak away and have a little privacy to read amidst the chaos upstairs. The bar was open, and used now and then - not a continuous stream by any means. But the tastings were fun! I mean, how often does a parent have the opportunity to do shots with your kids? Um, hey... that sounds a lot worse than it was...

And, as usual, shopping Friday in various combinations of people, the teenagers sleeping until noon (mostly), movies at the theatre and on the couch, grandpa doing projects in the house and yard, various people on the internet catching up on emails or tracking stocks or updating myspace accounts, the family band (cover your ears!), Carl and me writing a song and laying down guitar and vocal tracks on his portable 4-track recorder, and of course cards, cards, and more cards... the boy is good enough to keep himself in pocket money playing cribbage in college, but still can't beat the old man. Awww...

Everyone's gone now except the weeuns (as they say in Glasgow) and with them it's off to church this morning, a little Christmas decorating this afternoon and then off to the airport.

Next week... vacation's over. But it was nice while it lasted.

Medication

When I was back in the Midwest visiting my doctor (and daughter!) earlier this month, I knew something wasn't right. I hoped it would show up in the blood test result. And it did.

The Testosterone levels were at the low end of middle, but okay. The Thyroid levels were waaaaay off, though! The doc said that this could be the reason I was feeling more depressed and down, less able to handle stress. So she goosed the dosage, and already I can tell the difference. :) Better. Better.

What a difference this stuff makes. But you know, it also makes me wonder... can I even make decent decisions when my levels aren't right? Can I interpret circumstances properly? I'm starting to question my own judgement, and whether or not it's affected by the medication. Yikes!

Who Moved My Big Cheese?

This morning I'm supposed to be in a large meeting of field-based executives who are in for a semiannual confab. I'll be on the dais myself this afternoon around 4ish doing some technical training of the group. I always look forward to that type of experience. It's like being on stage, performing again. :)

But the first session today is a group of Big Cheeses doing a panel discussion for the assembled multitude, some of which are there because they long to simply touch the hem of an executive's garment and so have careers mystically healed. Yesterday the organizers were grousing about how there will be so many "crashers" (groupies, crowd followers, etc.) that they needed to expand the room, and still think it will be SRO. So, why not yield my seat to someone who gives a ... um, I mean, to someone who is truly eager to sit at the feet of the wise and learned. Well, I am too, I guess. The trick is to find some.

I recall not two months ago, when catching Rug and Mousewoman in an unguarded moment, that I heard her complain about the mess that still needs cleaning up from her predecessor's regime. Rug reported to her predecessor at the time of that conversation and gave her a fellow insider's knowing assent. That man (whom I'll refer to as Mr. Clean) is now the CXX or some such set of initials and is one of the big cheeses presenting this morning. I've met him, the CYY and the CZZ, too. I'm pretty sure that they wear pants and underwear like most of us do.

There are exceptions to that of course. I may have seen some of those exceptions in Scotland. ;) Dang it. I should have bought one of those things for myself. Woohoo, sure felt *that* breeze!

Passed the leadership trinity on the street on Tuesday, in fact. They were walking over to a photo shoot in a big hotel, and I was going to my desk from the parking garage. If I didn't know who they were, I would have thought they were the most ordinary of men. And they may be exactly that. Mr. Clean has that reputation anyway. People shake their heads and wonder how he got promoted.

Some people get promoted to be Big Cheeses because they are truly talented, with useful skills and abilities. Some get their shot because they are really good with people - natural leaders. Some can present a consistent, unruffled confident corporate image. And yet, others get promoted despite the fact that they possess none of the above, in a big time way. But they know somebody. Or are handy.

For a while I think that held true for me. I got shots at promotions and new assignments because I had mentors, not because I was good with people, had useful skills or exuded a corporate image. Instead, I'm withdrawn & aloof, have mediocre business skills at best, and exude quirkyness while being way too transparent about what I really think. Yet, I rose up the ladder... I think it was because a Big Cheese was helping me.

Since I left Wazoo Corp. (after the corporate takeover) that has NOT been the case, and the Peter Principle has come into play. The Peter Principle, for the uninitiated, is that we are always promoted to our level of incompetence. However, if you have a highly placed mentor, the Peter Principle is automatically suspended for you in that organization. And, if you rise high enough, even if you are incompetent the organization must not admit it, because it reflects poorly on their ability to identify talent. They have to promote you again to some place where you can't hurt them.

I recall some 15 years ago, and continuing for the next 7 or 8 years until about the year 2000, watching the Big Cheeses at Wazoo Corp. I tried to understand what made them successful, but I focused on their public behaviors, not their private connections or innate abilities. I would watch them work a room, speak to a group of middle managers, greet workers at lunch, etc. I thought - I'll be doing that some day; I'd better figure out how.

Not anymore. There's some combination of jadedness, cynicism, loss of ambition, recognition of my limitations, a sense that time is fleeting, a desire for greater meaning, etc., that has said to me: "stop stop stop!" I am *not* going to be a Big Cheese. I don't aspire to it, and I'm not going to even *try* to be one. In the sport of corporate ladder climbing, some need to be down on the field of play, some need to be spectators watching and cheering for their favorites, and some - like me - need to be in the broadcast booth doing color commentary. :) I've officially retired from professional ladder climbing. I'm the former athlete (not to be referred to as washed-up or has-been, however) turned analyst.

And really, I had my day in the sun as far as that goes. My last job at Wazoo was not a Big Cheese, but a good-sized one, a Nearly Big Cheese, I'd say. But even then, I wasn't corporate. I was quirky, entertaining, self-deprecating, transparent to the point of once in a while needing to be reprimanded by a Big Cheese for being too honest. You can tolerate that in a department head, even in a senior executive, the VP of Such and So. But not in anyone higher up than that. So... it won't be me as a Big Cheese. Too much of an outlier, too much of an oddball.

Now, I suppose if they dropped it on me, I'd take it. But, I would probably wind up being an embarrassment to someone if I were going to be true to myself. I think it would be better if I were named CSS (Chief Of Something Smaller.) Like a classroom maybe. :) Then I could be quirky, transparent, entertaining, emotional, and... be liked for it. The young minds full of mush would leave my class and say: "he is kind of a funny old guy, isn't he? Eccentric, you know; odd - but sweet. I like him. And I actually sort of understand what he's trying to say. He's definitely my most interesting class this semester."

I'd take that.

The envelope, please...

The check is in the mail! Today!

Okay, so it's Veterans' Day or something and it isn't going anywhere until tomorrow, but still - it's in the mail, doggone it!

My application to Grad School is en route, with money. Evening classes start January 4. I&II Samuel (OT225) on site and Emergence of the Church (NT112) on line. I'm going! I'm finally going.

God help me. I wanna do this well. I hope I'm not just fooling myself... I mean, me - seminary! Can that work?

Squeezing again

Met with Pebo & Rug yesterday for a 30 day followup on our "get your butt back in the office!" meeting of a month ago. Pebo continues to squeeze. Everytime I'm in a meeting with him, I start to itch. Even a group lunch where nobody discussed work - I was edgy and wanted to get away. What is it with me, with him? Arghh.

While I'm checking items off the to-do list, it still feels like the evaluation criteria of what success looks like for my department keeps changing based on whatever my business partners discuss with Pebo in the hallway this week. Perceptions are so slippery... I have a hard time knowing where to grab this fish to keep it from flopping out of my hands.

And, while I'm grabbing at the fish, Pebo is pouring more water on it, keeping it slippery, and watching me struggle while offering pithy commentary ("coaching"). Grrrrrr....

A dream deferred?

I've been mulling over a couple of verses lately:

Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good;
And what does the LORD require of you
But to do justice, to love kindness,
And to walk humbly with your God?

Proverbs 13:12 Hope deferred makes the heart sick,
But when the desire comes, it is a tree of life.



Some of you know that I've wanted for some, oh, 18 months or more now, to prepare for a change in careers as I get closer to retirement.

I know, I know, that's quite a ways off. 14+ years.

But a year and a half ago, before learning that my division was closing and my job was going away, it had seemed much closer. I had thought "5 more years until I can opt for early retirement and lock in retiree health benefits for later use when my income is low." And I thought "this will let me go back to school, get my Masters and then teach, without worrying about health coverage or a decent pension."

It seemed like such a good plan. I had struggled for so many years with supporting the profit expectations of my employers, when I really wanted to influence the generation coming up behind me to (as Micah the prophet says) "do justice, love kindness, walk humbly with their God", integrate their faith with the rest of their life, and behave ethically and compassionately in the marketplace. This was going to be my opportunity! So I enrolled in night school, excited about the dream.

But with the forced change in employment to a new company and a move to a new part of the country, away from support and away from school, that dream seemed dead. Now I will have to work until 65 at least, at a job that's demanding enough to preclude a course of study, or so it seems.

Yet, two Sundays ago, the pastor preached on the dreams in your heart, where they come from, whose they are, and how likely it is that they will come to pass. At the same time, I found an extension campus about an hour away from me which is affiliated with a great seminary in St. Paul. They offer classes Thursday nights in the exact major I was wanting to earn - an M.A. in Theological Studies.

All of a sudden, the dream maybe isn't dead anymore. Maybe... maybe...

I have a magnet on my cabinet at work, a quote from Mary Lou Retton. It says: "Each of us has a fire in our hearts for something... find it and keep it lit!"

Oh, I know what the fire is for - but can I keep it lit? For 18 months it's been out completely and I have felt its loss. I've been heartsick because of the hope that was deferred. Do I dare light the fire again?

50-something

(sigh)

I had to change the header of the blog today. I started this thing some 18 months ago or so, before the big 5-0. Now, I guess I can't say I'm "nearly-50" anymore. Awww...

"50ish" works though, I think. Then I won't have to change the header for a while. :)

And you know... if I could be 10 again, I wouldn't do it. It was not fun. 20 wasn't either (I'd just gotten fired.) And 30, 40 - no point in doing those over. I would never do child-rearing again (sorry, kids). Well, maybe if I got a government worker's pension out of the deal... nahhh! Not even that. Besides, they turned out pretty well the first time. :) If I did it over again, I might really mess them up.

These are good years to be alive and healthy. I like being this age. To me it's the best yet. I'm in decent shape, vigorous, have a trimmed back lifestyle, enough discretionary income to indulge myself now and then, enough accumulated wisdom to know when to hold back for the good of others, something to teach and share, brand new experiences all the time, and many many life goals checked off the list... these are the best years of my life. My twenties? Man, you can have 'em.

Two years ago, while preparing for a Sr. High Sunday School class, I made up this little proverb to sum up one's outlook on aging, and I think it holds true (at least everyone who's heard it says so):

You know you're grown up when you stop wanting to be older. You know you're old when you start wanting to be younger.

By that definition, I'm nowhere near old yet. I'm enjoying being this age. What is it, again? I forget... :)

Grace vs. Karma

The pastor (younger of the two) yesterday preached on having a dream, and how to know if it's one God has inpsired in you, or if it's one you sort of made up to satisfy yourself. Interesting, and it opened me up to an idea... but more on that another time.

During the sermon he referred to a song by U2 (his favorite band) called Grace. He referenced the line that says Grace "travels outside of karma". The song has a duality to it, referring not only to a girl with the name Grace but also to the idea of grace. You can see it in the lyrics that follow.

His point was that most religions (incl. Judeo/Christian) have some form of karma built in - you reap what you sow, etc., but what makes the Jewish and Christian religions unique is the concept of grace. Most religions say that we'll ultimately get what we deserve. But no others say that we ever receive *more* than we deserve. In most, even Paradise must be earned.

Mercy and grace are two sides of the same coin. Mercy is NOT getting what we rightly have coming to us (condemnation due to wrongdoing), and grace is GETTING what we have no right to at all (intimate fellowship with a Holy God.) If anyone knows of a religion like that, other than Judaism/Christianity... what is it?



Grace
She takes the blame
She covers the shame
Removes the stain
It could be her name

Grace
It's a name for a girl
It's also a thought that changed the world
And when she walks on the street
You can hear the strings
Grace finds goodness in everything

Grace, she's got the walk
Not on a ramp or on chalk
She's got the time to talk
She travels outside of karma
She travels outside of karma
When she goes to work
You can hear her strings
Grace finds beauty in everything

Grace, she carries a world on her hips
No champagne flute for her lips
No twirls or skips between her fingertips
She carries a pearl in perfect condition

What once was hurt
What once was friction
What left a mark
No longer stings
Because grace makes beauty
Out of ugly things

Grace makes beauty out of ugly things

Easing his grip

Met with Pebo today, and reviewed status on a number of things. He was pleased and very encouraging. I felt his grip loosening. Ahhhh...

And yet, I know if I let down for a second and he gets nervous, he'll start squeezing again. Maybe a dog wearing a shock collar is a good analogy. Get too close to the edge of the lawn (or in my case, too far astray from the work plan) and... zap!

(sigh)

My dog, Inferno, got used to it. Maybe I will too! :) He still gets into mischief in the house. I'll bet I still can. ;)

Ha. Right. Mischief at my age. That reminds me of a song lyric sung in the 40's by Julia Lee, a rhythm & blues singer. She sings to her aging lover man:

When you were young,
Your motor was fine.
Now your rear end's shot,
You're in low gear all the time!

You ain't got it no more.
You ain't got it no more.
Can't get yourself arrested!
You ain't got it no more.



Not me, though. Hey, baby, I still got it! Oh yeah!

Um, I think so anyway.

Hm.

Feeling Squeezed

It was a tough week this week. Since I lost Alpaca for a dotted-line boss, and picked up Pebo in his place, the intensity level has ratcheted way up. Pebo has a hands-around-the-throat management style (or at least that's how it feels to me), and when he feels pressure from Mousewoman, his boss, the approach that he seems to resort to with his staff is... squeeze tighter.

Now, for a guy like me who's highest value/need in life has historically been autonomy (you know, setting my own course, making my own choices, not following a script, being the car on the highway with no one in front of him...) this is uncomfortable. I don't mind being responsible for my own choices, and I always have done so. I DO mind having my choices being prescribed for me by others, or influenced to such an extent (by others whom I care about, or for whom I have responsibility, or to whom I owe allegiance) that I feel I really have NO choice at all, and must do X, or else the result is too harmful to those around me, even though it's not really what I want for myself. I chafe at that, and always have.

But in the past, I've had more ability to tolerate it, bite back the irritation, compromise and give in, than I do now. With all that's happened over the last 18 months, recovering from medical issues, adjusting to medications, losing my chance at early retirement & grad school & career change, losing my job and having to uproot, starting over again, leaving loved ones of all sorts behind, losing my Dad and my brother, losing resources with financial setbacks from the relocation, etc., etc.... I have less capacity to handle stress and disappointment than I've had in the past. It's like having an immune system that's compromised, so that any little illness becomes a major deal.

So when my boss, and therefore the rules/expectations at work, change mid-stream, I find it more of a blow, harder to take than usual. And it spills over into how I handle everything else. Personal (interior) life, family life, work life - it's all interrelated and running together these days, I can't compartmentalize. My tendency when faced with this is to want to get some space, hit the open road, and let everybody figure things out on their own, me included. When I feel constrained by circumstances I can't control, my instinct is to jump the fence, and behave like the wild untamed stallion, not like the gelding broken to saddle and bridle which everyone prefers.

Scotland is calling me back. :)

Reality

bites, or so I've heard it put.

Too bad vacations have to end. :)

Back to piled up emails, projects that haven't finished, concerned bosses, people needing direction, an overfull and rapidly changing calendar. And that's just at work.

(sigh)

From what I read, Heaven is not one long vacation, but it's just life (and work) in Paradise, without the work having to be by the sweat of your brow and without all the thorns and thistles that come up along with the vegetables...

I'm ready for that. Work that is not frustrating or counterproductive. What a great idea. Who came up with that, anyway? ;)

I could get angry at Adam for screwing it up for everybody... but - I am Adam.

Scotland!

is soooo different from Iceland. What contrasts!

Castles in lush countryside...

to kilts in an urban setting...

from the traditional...

to the historically innovative...

to the very modern...

grace and charm blended, in a vibrant working-class city full of the friendliest people! They really mean it here when they say Cheers!

I could stay here a while. While waiting for my bus, I was tempted to miss it completely and not come back at all! :)

Iceland!

How to describe it here?

It´s ethereal, bleak, stark, austere, rugged, active, varied.

The weather is 45 degrees, misty, breezy, overcast. Perfect! :)

Spent day one touring the city and going to the spa (see pictures).

For all the quaintness and picturesqueness of the city shown to tourists, there is also a "back of the house" that's less presentable.

Day two was spent seeing the sights of nature during the day (see pictures),

and the club scene at night (NO pictures!).

Day three (today) is spent catching up on email and blogging, organizing pictures, and shopping.

And oh yes, eating! So far... lamb soup, lamb hot dogs, skyr (a variation on yogurt), herring (ick), fish and chips, fish buffet, muesli, cold cuts for breakfast, and lots & lots of coffee.

It seems too soon to leave... but Glasgow awaits.