Book Review: Dangerous Wonder

I finished the book Dangerous Wonder earlier this week, and just wanted to say a few words about it, and again, highly recommend the read. It's actually a very short book, and full of very cool stories of people living life recklessly, irresponsibly, and altogether fantastically.

You might not think reckless and irresponsible would lead to "fantastic" but in this case, they do.

Mike Yaconelli presents a case for living life like a child. The last chapter kind of surmised the whole thing: be like a little kid. Jesus told us that we wouldn't see the kingdom unless we did, and it's so true. When we lose our kid-ness (and become "grown ups") we forget what it's like to trust, to play, to enjoy the moment, to be excited about the ordinary, and to be able to ask for help. All of those things are essential parts of life in the kingdom of God. And all are far too easy forgotten.

There were a few great, real-life stories of unabashed, unashamed grace and love shown to people - who did not deserve it. Usually from a child to an adult. You really need to read the book, but let me give you a couple examples.

He told of a type-A dad who had a very set routine every day when he came home from work. It was so set that his three-year-old son knew it by heart as well. One day, when he came home, the son came up to him and told him he had something for him. So he went over to the counter where the cookies were, climbed up (almost knocking down all the glasses) got a cookie... spilled the rest of them, but put them back... even poured a glass of milk for his dad - spilling a bunch on the floor in the process.

The best part of the story --- the dad just smiled, and accepted the gift of love from his son! It would have been easy to criticize all the mistakes, and the mess... but in a moment of greatness, he just let his son love him. What a great story!

The other story was near the end of the book, and featured the author himself. He and his wife had taken in a teenage boy for a time who had an abusive, drunken father. He eventually went on his way, but as "luck" would have it, a couple years later, the author and his wife needed to have some flooring installed, and the only contractor available to do it was the "drunken father!" They protested, but the supply company insisted, it was him or a very long wait. They chose the drunken father, but kept a very careful eye on him, assuming he would somehow try to cheat them.

As the work progressed to the final stages, Yaconelli came in to inspect and said that he'd be in his office, so the contractor could come get his payment there. Drunken father replied, "Oh yes, I need to talk with you about the bill." Yaconelli was infuriated and was certain that the man would try to weasel more money out of them - but he would hold firm!

When the man came in, finished with his work, he sat down and began writing out the bill. Yaconelli said he was quite ready to take on anything this guy had to dish out. But when the contractor finished writing, he looked up and said, "A couple years ago, I was a drunk, and I abused my family. You guys took in my son at a crucial time in his life, and saved my family. I've been sober ever since, and it has a lot to do with what you did for our family." Then he handed them the bill marked "Paid In Full".

That is just a perfect picture of grace. The unloveable was the one doing the loving. So cool.

Lots of great moments like that, and a reminder to live life to the fullest - like Jesus said he came to bring us - and definitely worth the read! Click the book cover above to buy a copy, or just check it out at your local library.

Next, in the queue... CS Lewis' Screwtape Letters, as well as In a Pit With a Lion on a Snowy Day.

Polygamists and Government

I wanted to comment on the incident that took place recently in Texas, where authorities stormed a private ranch and took everyone by force, separating kids from their families, and all sorts of very not-American things. It just made me sick when I heard about it.

I am not a polygamist. But I am a "libertarian". Not by political affiliation, by principle. We here in America (according to the Declaration of Independence) feel that all are created equal and should inherently be free. Especially freedom of religion. Now, that can make you do some kooky things. And you should have the freedom to do kooky things. You can't force other people to, and there are weird lines there when religion is involved, but in general, I'm against the government deciding what's too kooky.

For the second time this week I am linking to a column by Bob Lonsberry, local radio talk show personality. He's abrasive and a bit crazy sometimes, but sometimes can be poignant and present very valid points. He wrote what I wanted to (with much more information that I had) regarding the state seizing not only the ranch and the people, but their children and "relieving" the parents of their parental rights. All of them. As a group. Before proving any sort of guilt.

Yikes.

We're pretty kooky in our own right. We Campbells. We don't do things like most people. In most ways, I think that makes us stand out in a good way. But what if the government were to catch wind of our crazy thinkings? You mean, they don't really do school (like we do) with their kids... they just learn from every day as it unfolds?? or... Well, this won't happen yet, but, You mean they are Christians, but they don't attend any church services of any kind??? There are many more ways we're "different"... and we are raising a family of people to be "different". Where is it OK for the government (local, state, federal) to decide that our "different" has crossed some line and now our children are unsafe?

I might be drawing conclusions that are too extreme, but really... it's scary. What happened in Texas should not have happened in America, and I think we will continue toward this style of governing until all of our liberties are taken away. That's quite pessimistic, coming from my mouth... but unfortunately it's not just our politicians, it seems decades of cultural thought has already moved us far down that path of trusting "experts" and "institutions" more than individuals.

Quite sad.

So, for now, we Campbells will keep being kooky, and loving everyone God places in our path. (Including each other!) :-)

related links
ABC News

[Things That Are Weird] Phone Walkers

I tend to walk around and do stuff while I'm on the phone. Sometimes it's even just aimless walking, but usually I am just multi-tasking. Do you? I was meeting with a new client yesterday, and he did the same thing. He just took off and started pacing his house as soon as he answered the phone. He was a pretty good phone walker!

The cutest though is Kirsten and Julia. Whenever they chat with their grandparents, they are usually hold the phone to their ear and walking around our entire first floor. Julia usually just starts walking in a very tight little circle! So cute!!

But... since this is a Things That Are Weird...

Why DO we feel the need to start walkin' when we're chattin' on the phone?

Still?

I can't really believe that this still comes up, but I've been talking with a friend who is in the market for a new computer, and though there are several people close to them who insist they would love a Mac, is still convinced that he can get "the same" computer for less. Folks... this is just not true. Perhaps a little less... but usually the opposite is true. I wrote about this here TWO YEARS ago, and Apple has gotten heaps better in those two years.

I was trying to figure out why I can't just let it go sometimes. I think it's just my personality. I need stuff to be true. (Though, not in everything... but I guess the stuff I care about.) If someone just doesn't want a Mac, that's OK (too bad, but OK) ;-) But if they say they don't want it because they can get the same computer for less... that's just not true. I think it all works out pretty evenly in the end, except with a Mac you get no viruses, spyware, everything just works "out of the box" (all included in the computer) and you get the Mac OS, which is fantastic. (Not to mention their superior customer support.)

I'm really not trying to be a salesman... and I TOTALLY understand the need to spend less on a lesser product simply due to lack of funds. TOTALLY. But I just wanted to say again, Macs are not ridiculously overpriced. You get what you pay for, and we think, with Mac, you get even more than what you pay for.

If you're at all interested, or even if you think you know that you're NOT interested... check out this section of Apple's website. apple.com/getamac. Not only are all the cute/funny ads there, read the 10 reasons (and more) "Why You'll Love a Mac." Great list. Explained well.

Everyone gets to choose and use what they'd like, but we, the Campbells, can't say enough how great Macs are, and how much you'll love 'em if you try 'em.

(This blog post brought to you by an Apple fan and user for over 13 years now. No money was received for this endorsement.) :-)

The Issue Of Race

Wow, that title is way to broad - and official - for this particular blog post. It's accurate, but there's obviously too much that can be and has been said on that topic.

Some friends of mine have been having a (mostly) civil discussion over Barak Obama's recent speech on the issues of race in America. (Note: Please forgive any ignorance re: the content of that speech. It's been a busy time around here! Haven't gotten to hear/read the actual speech, just read/heard/seen snippets of reaction to it.) I did not really weigh in on the email discussion because of that, but after watching Meet The Press tonight, I do have some thoughts on the more general subject.

I am a white male. That fact (way beyond my control) might negate anything I say regarding "race issues" in the minds of some people. That's too bad. I think that proves that those people are missing the point (though, I certainly understand how I could be as well).

There are no races. There. I said it. There is one race: the Human Race. Right? Are we all really different enough to say that we are actually different races? Really? 'No' is the correct answer. I will not go into (nor do I have enough understanding of) all the genetics and scientific rationale behind that statement, but I can pretty safely say, there are no races... just one.

So why do we perpetuate the race "card"? Why do any of us? None of the real people I do life with do. None. Not one. It never comes up. (Ha. Except maybe my brother-in-law... but he's a different sorta fellow...) :-) It's completely irrelevant. Actually, so is gender. People are people. At least, that's how it is to me, and it's my perception of how it is to my friends.

But that's not what the media would have us believe. That's not what many would have us believe. We watch a NASA podcast that almost every episode declares some amazing fact about how that very week the first "asian-american woman from kansas" did something in space, or the first "black man from russia over the age of 50" did something else. Just silly people. WE ARE ALL THE SAME. Our skin may look different, but why do we perpetuate the differences? They are subtle at best. Culture, tradition, and racism perpetuate this insane notion of "races".

There are no races. Only one. We're all one "race".

Argh.

So, I've heard he gave a great speech. I will at least read the transcript. But I wish Mr. Obama (whom I guess is "multi-racial"... isn't that evidence that we are just one "race"?) would just ignore the race issue and talk about things that are more important to our country. I admit some naivety on this. I am not currently a "minority" group... but I hear that I soon will be. What then? Will "white" people be "featured" or "spotlighted" for their accomplishments simply because of their lack of pigmentation?

Seriously. I just don't understand.

So, my thoughts tonight... admittedly random and probably not focused due to my brain, heart, and body being all about my ever-growing household this past week or so... but I think I have said here before that if we could ever stop labeling people, grouping people, seeing "races"... we'd be so much better off.

The craziest part is that we do it as an effort to help diminish racism, or to combat it... but it only fuels it. More segregation - even with the best of intentions - only perpetuates the thing we are trying to end. Until we can see that we are indeed one race, there will always be "racism".

That's how I see it, anyway.

Simple But Hard

Quick story before bed...

Tonight I was talking to Julia (our almost two-year-old) about an event at lunch today. The lady behind the cash register thought Julia was a very cute baby (turns out she has a two-year-old of her own) and just gave her a friendly greeting. Well, Julia who is normally very friendly decided to not reply to this person, and hid her head in Dad's shoulder. A few attempts to get a response from her were in vain.

Finally, as we were leaving, she mustered a smile. (Maybe it was the free toy [read:bribe] that the lady handed out...)

That was the end of that, and I apologized for Julia, but of course the cashier thought nothing of it. "I have a two year old, also!"

So fast forward to the dinner table. I told Mom the story, half re-telling it to Joodles. She was listening intently (people don't give two year olds enough credit!) and finally I repeated what had happened (acted it out) and Julia sort of laughed, but then I asked her if she would like it if someone did that to her? Surprisingly, she immediately said, "Nooooooo!" I think she really did understand (though I know there will be PLENTY more training to come...) :-)

It was pretty amazing to see how even at not-quite-two, Julia understood the concept of, "Treat other people the way you want to be treated." And right there I said, "It's so crazy how simple the idea is... every thing is better when we think of other people that way... but how hard it is to actually do it."

Even when you're one.

UBA

I saw a pretty cool thing on the Red Robin website today. We love their food, and celebrate all of our birthdays there, but now I will also be visiting their website.

It's called UnBridled Acts (of kindness), and just features stories of their employees going way above and beyond their normal duties. I read two, and there was a neat one about a Red Robin employee just paying for the coffee for the car behind him, which started a crazy chain reaction that ended up coming back to that same guy...

Check it out. Always cool to see selflessness in action. Wish that was more the norm than an "amazing story".

(But then, it wouldn't make for as cool a web page...) :-)

Take Back Your Shopping Cart!

The other night we had finished shopping at Wal*Mart and after unloading all of our groceries into the van, I looked for the place to return my cart. It was pretty far away, but I wanted to make sure I put it back in the right place. There was another one right next to our van, so I put my cart in that one and pushed both to the cart return corral.

As I was doing all that, I was just perplexed as to why it's almost my first inclination to think about other people, and how my actions (or inactions?) will affect them, and how it seems that I am in the minority. There were carts all over the parking lot, in parking spaces, up on curbs, and just generally in chaos. Yes, I know they pay people to put them back, but isn't it fairly easy to return it to the collecting place? That way it's out of the way of where people drive and walk. Seemed so simple to me...

And don't forget that we had just spent almost two hours at Wal*Mart with our four tiny kids, late in the evening (was nearly 10pm when we were done) and had to still do bedtime (and put all those groceries away) when we got home! We had plenty of "excuses" to not put the cart(s) back.

I was reminded of a parenting class we have taken and led many times over the years. One of the core things they teach is a "rational preoccupation with others around you". The goal being to teach your kids to think about others, not just themselves. But in order to do that, it starts with you. And, a simple example they give is the shopping cart one. By simply taking less than a minute of your life to return your cart, you are thinking about the people who come behind or after you. You aren't doing it just because it is "right", but because you are thinking about the "preciousness of others" (a common phrase from the course) and loving other people like you do yourself. (Or, treating other people the way you want to be treated.)

(Yes, I thought all of this in the 30 seconds that it took me to take the cart back and return to the van.) :-)

I think what struck me the most is just how easy the task is, and how natural it is for me... and how uncommon it seemed to be that night. Why is it so difficult for us to think about each other? I see it in my kids. I feel like it's all I say, and yet, they are still quite selfish. I am constantly reminding them to think about how they would want to be treated. For the moment, they get it, but a moment later, they are back to looking out for their own interests rather than those of their closest sibling.

Why is this so hard for us to get?

I don't have the answer, but I do know for a fact that the world would be a better place if we would somehow get it, and start thinking about the people around us—treating them like we want to be treated.

And take our carts back. :-)

(NOTE: If you read the previous post, you might think, isn't this a bit of double-talk? Wasn't one of the examples of misunderstood Christian-ness taking back a shopping cart?? Yes. But I think if you read both, you'll see the constant in the equation: love for other people.)

Jesus Said

... we should be like children.
I think about that phrase quite often, since there are many children around me at any given moment. What part of being a child does Jesus want for us? Does he want us to be disrespectful, selfish, whiny, impatient, messy, crazies with little to no self-control? Uh... I guess... maybe? Probably not. But the innocent, trusting, fun-loving, joyful qualities of a child are easy to understand as qualities of the Kingdom. These are things that, though they might seem a bit unorthodox for the Kingdom ruled by the Creator himself, would seem appropriate.

The other day, my three-year-old daughter was shouting from the top of the stairs, "I neeeed hellllllp... Will somebody pleeeeeeease helllllllp meeee????" She had obediently gone up to the bathroom, done what she needed to do, and now she needed some assistance from an adult - again, obeying her Mom who had previously told her to wait for Mom's assistance after she goes "number two". My first thought was, "Man! That is so annoying!" But quickly, I was reminded of Jesus saying that we needed to be like little children. Could this be one of the ways?

I still maintain that Jesus was NOT talking about whining when he said that.

What I saw was a little girl who needed help, and wasn't afraid to ask for it. Most adults I know are not good at asking for help, maybe they are just plain awful at it. We're taught to be "adults" and take care of stuff on our own. But maybe a way we can be like a child - a way we can see the Kingdom of God - is to realize we need help, and to ask for it. Not necessarily from other people, but definitely from God. Our Father can, and wants to help us. One way we can know the greatness of the Kingdom is to let him help us, allow him to work in us, instead of trying to be an "adult" and get it done ourselves.

A cool lesson from my whiny three-year-old... who may know a bit more about the Kingdom that I have forgotten over my passage into adulthood.

... you will be persecuted because of me ...
Tonight we watched a debate on the existence of God. A friend had sent me the link earlier in the day, and tonight I was intrigued enough to watch it through with Jen. The debate was mostly silly... neither side was really listening to the other. They were to a degree, but neither was going to convince the other of their points, or sway their beliefs in any way. Some of it was sarcastic and mean-spirited... a little annoying actually. :-) I don't think I'm a big fan of debates.

But the thing that I noticed was actually part of the lead-up to the debate. The footage they chose to show to introduce the Christian guys (Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron of The Way of the Master) was of them sharing "the gospel" in the streets, and the hostile reactions of some unbelievers. While that may be common footage, and perhaps an expected response (at least by Christians) ... I was immediately reminded of where Jesus said that his followers would be persecuted because of him.

"Exactly!" misters Comfort and Cameron might say. However, as I recall from Scripture, the people who hated Jesus - who wanted to hurt and/or kill him - were the religious leaders of the day. The leaders of the religious establishment. They were the upstanding, moral, "religious right". We think the people who will persecute Christians, who will hate us because of our message, are the hardened sinners who reject God with passionate fervor. But every example I can think of in the Bible of "sinners" is almost completely the opposite. Those "hardened sinners" flocked to Jesus. It was the self-righteous, cleaned-up, religious folk who persecuted Jesus and his followers.

Just a couple things to think about from what Jesus said.

Hiroshima: Part 2

On the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima - Aug 6th - I mentioned that I picked up a book by the name of the city from our local library. It was a fairly short book, detailing the events of the lives of several survivors of the horrible day. It was fairly objective (quite unlike what a similar literary work would be today, I'm sure!) and just told the story plainly, as experienced by those witnesses, and tragically coerced participants.

The most interesting part was that the author visited one year after the bombing to get the stories, and even then, no one (according to the author) was really debating the morality of the atomic bomb. Whether out of a fear of all that had transpired, or truly just not questioning the ethics of such a weapon, there apparently was not much discourse regarding whether or not it "should" have been used.

Funny, cause that's all I can think about.

I mentioned in my previous post that it had been a long war. War is ugly, and I'm sure it numbs you to the reality of what you are doing. But still, I can not fathom making the decision to obliterate a city and 100,000 of its inhabitants with one swift, instantaneous motion.

I can understand the people who made the weapon. There had been credible rumors that the Germans were working on such technology, and if they had gotten it first - the "Master Race" - it could have been beyond disastrous. So, it made sense for us to race to complete it first. And, we did. (I think it was later discovered that the Germans were not near as close as we had feared.) So, perhaps once the scientists had completed their work - in the form of a functioning "atomic" bomb - they had time to debate the moral implications of their achievements. But I can also see there how not attempting to "discover" the weapon first would have been equally (or perhaps even more) morally questionable.

But once the bomb was ready, and able... that's where I am glad I did not have to be the decision maker.

From President Truman deciding to drop the bomb on a real city, with hundreds of thousands of people. (And then three days later to drop another one, even after seeing the total devastation!) To the pilots who left the ground, with the knowledge that their mission was to wipe out a city with one bomb. To the technician who had to activate the weapon once they left the ground. (They had not activated it for fear of any sort of accident at take off... would have been messy.) Once he activated it - or even while he was in process - how must that have felt? Knowing he was, by his weapon activation, condemning up to 100,000 people and their city, even their history, to death? What of the pilot(s?) who actually "flipped the switch" (or whatever they did) to drop the bomb?

I'm just glad it wasn't me.

In retrospect, you can say, "Look, within days the war was over. So, the end justifies the means." Well, yes. You can say that. But it's just so hard to swallow when you think that the bomb was used on real people. Not a target. They were not "casualties". They were moms and dads, children, grandchildren, brothers, sisters... just people. The book was very interesting. Reading how people reacted to such sudden catastrophe, helping each other out as much as they could... too fractured and instantly plunged into chaos to even question really what happened, or why it happened... they just kicked into survival mode. Which included helping the nearest stranger to survive.

One interesting thing after the Japanese surrendered, was the assistance of the Allied forces (likely led by America) in rebuilding Hiroshima, as well as attempting to understand - and find a cure for - the mysterious radiation sickness that had afflicted so many survivors. It seemed so ironic that we who had invented - and implemented - such a device, were right there in the aftermath trying to help "clean up". I think that is the "American Spirit", but I'm not sure what the big bomb part was.

I just wonder why we couldn't have bombed some more remote part of their mainland... wiping out some trees or something? I'm sure many have considered and debated all the possibilities for decades now. But, wouldn't that have demostrated the same power as actually blowing up cities? Maybe not.

So, anyway, I think I'll read a few more stories from that time. It's fascinating to me how we can do that to each other. We continue to do so, just not on that grand scale. Yet.

I may see something even worse in my lifetime. Who knows, it may be here in our own country. That doesn't seem possible right now, but you never know.

Some day war will end. For now, perhaps we can remember the atrocity of it, and avoid similar atrocities in the future?

Probably not.

Hiroshima: August 6th, 1945

After recently watching those two movies about the battle for Iwo Jima, I found it intriguing when I discovered that today is the anniversary of the day the US dropped the first atomic bomb on the city of Hiroshima, Japan. I clicked on the link in my "This Day In History" widget, and read about this day 62 years ago. I listened to President Truman's speech following the decision to drop the bomb. I watched some videos from the history channel online. Again, I was fascinated.

What most blew my mind was the position of Harry Truman. How do you actually ever feel you have the authority to make such a decision? How did he actually pull the trigger? I read one article that reminded me that the America of the 1940s was not the same one as today. In many ways that's really sad. But perhaps in the way of viewing people of various ethnic backgrounds as equals... we are certainly better off today than we were then. So some have suggested it was easier because they were just "Japs".

I should hope not, but certainly a possible explanation.

Because really, how do you decide to do that? The logic given in his post-dropping speech was that the Japanese would fight to the death. Killing up to "half a million" US soldiers. Dropping the bomb saved lives. While I agree that this is true, I do side with critics who believe that estimate is ridiculously high.

When he gave the order to drop the bomb, I'm sure it was not taken lightly. I'm sure agonizing thought went into it. And, it had been a long war. It was time for it to be over, and this weapon could pretty hastily ensure that it would be.

But at what cost?

I am not sure I could ever make such a decision. In retrospect, you're glad it ended the war, but as is everything surround a war, it's just so sad and ugly.

I borrowed a couple books from the library tonight on Hiroshima. One is just named Hiroshima by John Hershey. Supposed to have some eye witness accounts. Was written as the rubble was still smoldering. The second is a series of two books, The Memoirs of Harry Truman. That, too should prove interesting, as the hardest thing about Aug 6th 1945 for me to grasp is what actually was going on in Truman's mind? How do you make that call??

I'll likely share some thoughts from the books soon... just thought I'd post this on the day we dropped the bomb.

Happy 62nd anniversary of the first atomic bomb! (Now there's something to celebrate!) ;-)

Living In America

Earlier tonight while I was cleaning off our table after a meal, I just thought how crazy lucky we were to have it. It's a great table. I hope it's in our family for a long time. No matter where we may roam.

Then I thought... how crazy is it that we got to be born here?? This country where I can have this table. This time, where life is so incredibly wealthy, materially speaking. We are so, so lucky.

As far as I know, it's not within our control to determine where we are born... ;-)

Then I was struck by the fact that I was thinking these things when financially, things have never been less certain. Strangely, I am not overwhelmed by it at the moment. It's certainly not peachy keen. (Like that great sweet tea with peach I brewed up tonight!!) It's very uncertain. But, knowing God will always take care of us... we're ok with it.

OK enough to be blown away with how amazingly great we have it.

So, perhaps just a touch of perspective for me. And as I post it here, perhaps it is also that for you.

Friends, and Friends of Friends

As I was working on restoring our trailer yesterday (more about that later...) I was listening to a few podcasts, including the latest God Journey. The episode title was the same as the title of this post. Wayne Jacobsen was telling the story of his recent trip to Ireland to gather with around 100 people from all over the world, just to be together. It wasn't a conference with any sort of program or agenda, just a gathering of friends.

While he was there he said he realized that the Body of Christ is not about what we do together really, "the Body of Christ is friends, and friends of friends". He saw that as people from all over the world were connecting that week through other connections. "Hi [friend]! I'd like to introduce you to [my other friend]." And once the introduction had taken place, Jesus' body was grown and strengthened as they shared stories of what God has done and is doing in them.

There was not one sermon, not one time where everyone sat and listened to one person. There was only one song they all sang together. There were times when they were all together, but the focus was on each other, not any one thing they were doing. In a gathering of 100 people, there might have been 50 conversations. And again, none of this was planned or scheduled... they just let it happen. And it did.

So, it sounded like a cool week where part of the body of Christ was enjoying life as (perhaps) it's meant to be. It was encouraging to hear how God had brought all of those people together, one relationship at a time, over 30 years or so.

Toward the end of the podcast, as Wayne was reflecting on that week and some other recent events in his life, he said this:

"The fact that they've been 30 years related to each other says a whole lot about the fact that they didn't have an organization to carry together, because if they would have had an organization to carry together, they likely wouldn't still be in fellowship all of them with each other.

That's what our [personal] track record is like. ... If we hadn't had this machine among us, and the fight for who could control it, who was willing to fight to control it, we'd probably still be great friends today. Actually, the power of the institution got between us. There was something to fight over, something to own, something to have."

And I think those words instantly made me stop what I was doing, and make a mental note to go back and write them down. I know I have probably said something like that here before, but it is so true, and was evidenced at a party we were at this weekend.

My brother-in-law was being celebrated by his church for 25 years of service there. Twenty-five years is a LOT of years! He has also been married that long as of this coming October. So we were twice celebrating his oldness! :-) It was fun.

Part of the celebration was a slideshow of various moments over the past 25 years. It was nice to relive the memories, and to see old faces. (Some are not with us any more.) But as the slideshow went along, I noticed two things. First, one of the main memories was building a new building. I certainly remember how much effort we put into doing that. (That's when I was on staff with that group as well.) It certainly was a major event in the timeline of that group's existence. But it dominated a good portion of the slideshow, when I wished we could see more photos of people...

Second, and most disheartening, was once we got back to people, over and over all I could see were people who had been somehow hurt by others in the church, and had left hurt, disgraced, or disgruntled. I actually hope that I was the only one who noticed that. But I really did. So many faces of people who were somehow either hurt enough to leave, or else had no other option but to leave. Good people who were prime time players in the goings on of this organization.

Then I heard the words Wayne said regarding his observation of that group of believers in Ireland. They have no organization to protect. All they have is their shared life together. There's no building, no programs, no schedule, no "Purpose"... just 30 years of living life together with Jesus in common. I couldn't help but connect that thought with what I had seen and felt during that slideshow.

I know that people move on, and relationships (maybe even mostly) are "for a season". But I don't believe they have to end with hurt. Unfortunately, the specific organization I am talking about (as evidenced by what Wayne said) is not alone in its track record of disagreements leading to fractured fellowship. I am convinced that if we didn't have a "Thing" to protect, or to run, or to serve... we would enjoy being together that much more. The "Thing" (Wayne called it a "machine") definitely gets in between us. It can bring us together, but quite often, in the end, it gets in between us.

Living life outside of that Thing is interesting. It's certainly freeing, and we have never known God so personally and completely involved in everything we do more than we do now. It's also a bit frustrating relationally as many times we are not able to spend time with the friends we have made over the years because they are otherwise scheduled with events, gatherings, or meetings related to their particular Thing. Busyness is probably more an American problem than a problem with the Thing, but it is certainly evidenced there as well. But we are in America, so we have certainly seen that busyness limiting our time to just enjoy relationship with our friends who are Christians.

I don't really have a neat summary point to all of this. Just sharing some observations from the weekend. I really think it's true that we could really experience what the body of Christ is so much more if we weren't trying to do these "Things". I certainly have the limited perspective of just being me, and my 33 years or so on the planet. But from where I am now, and what I have seen... life is about people and relationships, not about what we do.

Seems that's quite well applied to the church, too.

No Needy People Among Them...

All the believers were united in heart and mind. And they felt that what they owned was not their own, so they shared everything they had ... and God’s great blessing was upon them all. There were no needy people among them, because those who owned land or houses would sell them and bring the money to the apostles to give to those in need.

Acts 4:32-35 (NLT)

Last night I had a dream. It was crazy. One of those very vivid dreams, and almost seemed relevant to some issues pressing on my mind and heart of late. I awoke this morning still contemplating all that I could remember from it. Some, or perhaps all of it, was related to the Scripture I later remembered and you just read above.

We were at some sort of convention of Christians. It was not a "church" thing, nor was it a "Christian convention". It was a convention of (mostly) Christians. One of the speakers - at least for the event that I witnessed in the dream - was a friend of mine from college, whom I admire in real life for his skills and business savvy. He does business well. He was doing it well in this dream.

After one of the main session times, we were chatting (he, and I, and Jen) and he said, "Man, that was so great! I heard that one person just donated $25,000 on the spot to [this thing we were raising money for]!" (Note: I can't remember what it was we were raising money for... but it was some facility or program or something that was to help people... it wasn't a church building, or a church program even... but it was Christians working together, raising money for this thing.)

My reaction was, "Wow. That is amazing." But, along with being impressed by the generosity, I was also amazed that we were spending money on this facility or program. First, I was impressed with my friend, who somehow had managed to convince people to donate such large amounts of money... :-) But then I was both impressed (as stated above) and then incredulous at what we throw money at.

In the dream, I turned to Jen and shared those thoughts with her, and then began to think aloud.

"What we really should do together," I theorized, "is give large sums of money like that to some organization that gets Christians out of debt. Clean slate, everything-is-forgiven out of debt. No questions asked." I felt like I was on a roll, so I continued, "We create this organization that is a non-profit, 501c3 organization and convince Christians who have plenty to donate sums like that $25,000 - receiving their tax deduction, of course - and the organization would distribute the money to Christians who are swimming in debt.

"Of course, we couldn't do that for ourselves," I explained, "since it might look a little fishy. But we could take a salary as the folks who run the whole thing." Jen's eyes lit up at that (in the dream still), as (at least in my conscious mind) she is always wishing we had just a little bit more money to pay our bills and buy groceries. I continued, "There would be no stipulations... just an enormous, overpowering debt that could be wiped clean by the Church... Christians helping Christians. 'And there were no needy people among them...'"

I actually don't remember where the dream ended, but it was somewhere around there. As my conscious thoughts took over, I began to think of the ramifications of my plan. At first, it seemed quite a fine idea. It seems to me to be a much better use of money - actually helping people instead of building buildings, or creating more stuff to do. And I thought of a couple refinements that might make the idea actually fly.

First, the receiving family would commit to destroying all of their credit cards, except one. But that one would be reduced to no more than a $5000 credit limit, for emergencies. What good would it be to pay off someone's debt if materialism - in whatever form - is the real problem? The debt will just return again.

Second, there will be ABSOLUTELY NO APPLICATIONS. The church (as you have noticed from everything I write and/or say) can not function as an institution. In so doing, you remove the life, the heart, the humanity from it. The funds would be distributed via relationships. Slower, yes. But a more vital and real solution to a difficult issue? I think so. People whose debt could be relieved would meet with someone from the organization, face to face, and after a meeting or two, funds could be apportioned.

So, theoretically, it all made good sense... and if it worked, a nice salary would help us pay our bills, and (eventually) eliminate our own debt.

But as I thought of all the logistics, and how much I seriously loathe dealing with money, and just how crazy money makes people - and how easily I would be taken advantage of... it became QUITE clear that even if this was a cool idea that came to me in a dream... I am definitely not the person to make it happen!.

Are you? Is this a good idea? Is there something already like this? What I have seen is that places help reduce debt... and teach folks how to better manage their money... but nothing as full of grace and so very church-in-Acts-like as my crazy dream-born idea.

I would be curious what you (especially if you are a follower of Jesus) think about such an idea... is it even possible in America where all must fend for themselves... you have to earn your keep... work for what you get... etc, etc, etc.

Any thoughts?

Control vs. Responding

Not long ago I mentioned that something was stewing in Ye Old Greg's Head... and indeed it has been. Head, heart, you name it. It seems that many places I turn these days the following thoughts pop in for a visit. Sometimes short, sometimes longer... but seeming to weave their way through a bunch of different areas effortlessly.

I was reminded of this trend today in a conversation with my neighbor. They just returned home with his wife's daughter - who is moving in with them for a while, going to college in the area - and he was sharing some stories illustrating how she does not handle change very well. Not well at all. :-) And I immediately thought of my sister, and a few other folks who really prefer to have a routine, and any deviation from that really, really throws them off.

"I think I have recently noticed," I told my neighbor, "that people who don't handle change well may indeed be personality-related, but I think it's something we all deal with on some level. We need to control stuff. Some of us more than others. Some of that has got to be built-in... but I think a lot of it - especially the ability to go with the flow - is (or can be) learned."

My neighbor completely agreed. Gave his dad as an example of "mellowing out". As he has gotten older, he is much more "go with the flow", "mellow", or just able to deal with what life brings. Is this a personality? Is it a learned skill? Is it just life experience and wisdom from years on the planet? Maybe it's all of them?

Whatever it is, I have noticed that I really, really prefer to try responding to instead of controlling my world.

Let me give you a few of the examples that I was talking about in last week's teaser.

First, if you haven't noticed (or if you are new here, and don't know us personally) we do stuff a little differently. We never dated. We didn't kiss until our wedding day. We have four children... and want more. We home school those same children. We love Jesus, and his church, but we don't attend any "church" as we have grown up knowing them. All of that is a little different than the societal "norm".

Recently as we thought about home schooling, Jen & I were just marveling at the idea of institutionalizing learning. It really baffles us now that we have been down this "home schooling" path for quite a while. See, home schooling does not mean school at home. We don't have a set time for "classes" every day. We do have "table time" for basic math, writing skills, etc, but that occurs only a couple times a week (if that!) and we consider that only the smallest part of our kids education. The real learning happens all the rest of the time. Those things are just a few necessary skills for life. And really they aren't learned during a "lesson" time... they are learned as they are put into practice in the rest of life.

Institutions teach us the opposite. The real learning of any value happens in the academic (institutional) setting. Knowledge must be passed along in a structured way, at a certain time. I think we were talking about the way NY State thinks they know what each of our kids should learn at what age. My sister lives in Maryland and had an interesting experience with the school system telling her to "slow down" with her daughter... she "knows too much"! Holy cow!

I know that there must be some value in institutions, but I am growing farther and farther away from that type of thinking. See, in that model, uniqueness of individuals is too easily lost. My son Ian can read like an 8th grader, writes like a kindergartner, does math at probably a 3rd or 4th grade level... and those are just the "academic skills". Interpersonal communication - he's off the charts. His memory is fantastic, way better than most anyone I know. He is very artistic, creative. And he just loves people, and is so good at considering others. But he's also a huge goofball who often needs to be reminded to focus on what he's doing. That's quite a mix of levels there. But the state institution would have us believe that Ian should be doing A, B, C, and D - for 180 days a year, or some amount of hours - when he is a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th grader.

What an institution is trying to do is control learning. It is the attempt by a group of people or a society to contain, package, and repeatedly apply with a broad brush something that I don't think can be contained that way. Mainly because I think learning happens in life, and life can not be contained, packaged, or otherwise transferred en masse.

The same goes for the way we live today as the church. We have created hugely elaborate systems (ok, some are less "elaborate") ;-) to pass along life with Jesus. We know it's a great thing, and want everyone to experience it - everyone needs it, right? - so we have all these great ways that have worked in the past (or, we get the occasional "new" idea...) that we try to contain, package and then apply to the next person who comes in the door.

Just like with learning... life with God can not be contained, packaged or mass distributed. At least, not in my experience. God is living. An individual who interacts with each of us personally. Individually. You can't say for me how God is going to lead, direct, teach, interact with me. You can tell me what your experience has been with him, and in many ways that may be similar to mine... but it can't be neatly contained so as to repeat it again with similar results.

There's the thing right there. We love the idea that we can control life. That's what institutions are. Church, School, Government, etc, etc, etc. These are systems we create to manage people in a similar way to produce similar results. Problem is, we're really not all that similar. I mean, we kinda are... that's why it kinda works. But only kinda.

The alternative I have noticed is what God has led us into over the past several years. We have consistently been learning to structure and plan less of our lives, and to follow the daily lead of our Leader. We have freed up our schedule a LOT and that has allowed us a lot more time to be together as a family, with our four very young kids. That's awesome! It's given us the freedom to respond to last minute invitations, as well as offer last minute invites to friends/neighbors who pop into our minds.

Fewer plans also allows us to just enjoy where we are at that moment. We aren't trying to accomplish some other things while doing whatever we're doing. Jen just shared with me tonight that this week she has tried to stop doing other things while playing with the kids outside. And late in the week she finally noticed that she wasn't frustrated anymore when Julia needed something, or Alex asked her to watch him do something. She was available to respond in the moment, not trying to follow a plan.

And as I mentioned above, we try to do most everything we do in a "responding" way instead of a "controlled" way. Life with other Christians (the Church), "educating" our children. I can't even really write it, cause it's just... not a thing. We don't even consider it a separate area of life. It just IS life. Both of those things.

Is any of this making sense? It's almost 2:30 am, and there are so many thoughts in my head on this, and so many occasions to which it has so clearly applied... I know there will be people who will misunderstand what I am saying and think that I mean that no good comes from a plan. Plans are fine. They won't always work, but if that is known ahead of time, one can respond to whatever actually happens with greater ease. It's not really that... it's a general approach to life.

Do you want to go through life taking control (or at least, attempting to), or would you rather respond to life as it comes? The latter does not mean sitting on your butt waiting for life to come to you... it means in your heart, are you about your own agenda, your own purpose... or are you open and available for God to lead you to what he is doing in that moment? Are you able to respond to life as it happens, or just break down (like our neighbor's daughter) when something changes that seems momentarily big?

I definitely feel like God is teaching me to respond to life rather than try to control it. And I have noticed that such an approach certainly requires a good deal of trust in him. But it also certainly offers great freedom, and peace, and I think the great "reward" of a richer, fuller life. At least... in the important things.

I am not certain that approach would lead you to be a good CEO of a giant corporation... but, who knows? If that's what God wants you to be... he'll lead you there!

I guess the question is... are we leading, or are we following the Leader? Are we trying to control, or are we free to respond?

Rules vs. Relationship

At the home of some good friends the other night, my son Ian told our hosts that Alex didn't like something (I forget what) because he doesn't like rules... "just like Dad." :-) That gave our friends a little chuckle (maybe partly because they know it's true!) and initiated a brief conversation about the need for rules in society. One opinion was that, in our fallen state, we need rules. We can't function without them. Another opinion (mine) was that we are not made to be bound by rules. Ideally we live free - governed by our own internal rules. I do admit that not everyone chooses to live this way, which necessitates the "rules", but that's why I think rules are always hurtful. They never help, they always limit and detract from the fullness of whatever they are trying to protect.

But I could still completely see the other point of view. So I pondered a bit more why I think it's possible to live sans rules. What I came up with was just from thinking about my own motivations. When I do something for someone else (or, perhaps, don't do something) it's never to meet the requirements of some rule. I never think, "I need to leave that MacBook Pro on my Dad's desk because the Bible says 'Don't Steal'." Instead, I leave the MBPro there (against my impulses...) :-) because I love my Dad. It belongs to him, and it would hurt our relationship for me to take it.

Now, perhaps you think using my Dad was a bad example. Or something as valuable as a MacBook Pro. Let's take a different example. I'm at the bank, and I use their pen to sign my check and fill out the deposit slip. "The pen seems kinda cool... I need one... they won't miss it..." but then your conscience gets the better of you and you think, "No... God says, 'Don't Steal', and that means pens too!" And you leave the pen, thanks to your obedience to the rule.

But what if relationship - even to someone you don't really know - motivated you instead? Instead of thinking "Thou shalt not steal," maybe think, "That pen belongs to someone else, and I wouldn't like it if they took mine, so I'm not going to take it." Or, if stealing is not your gig... think about anything else we have rules for. Step out of the context of obedience to the RULE and think about how you can love - or not be loving - your neighbor by your actions.

It creates a freedom far beyond what any "righteous" obedience to a set of morals could offer. We are free to love because we are loved. When we love, and act out of love, we are living "under the rules" but not by the rules. Does that make sense? Everything I do, I want to have the people around me in the front of my mind. How will what I do - or don't do - affect those around me? I am not considering rules... I am considering relationship.

There is the freedom of living not under rules, but out of love. The former is accomplished by the latter, but the motivation is different. If motivated by rules, we will always fail. We will not live up to the standards, or maybe even need to "break a rule" in order to love someone. But if we live out of love, the heart of the rule is fulfilled.

Matthew 22:35-40 (New Living Translation)
One of them, an expert in religious law, tried to trap him with this question: “Teacher, which is the most important commandment in the law of Moses?”

Jesus replied, “‘You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. A second is equally important: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments.”

Our Only Rule Book

Inspired by recent readings, hearings and various thinkings floating through GregsHead, I have thought again about our push for being right. For knowing the truth and letting others "have it". I read a column this morning by a local radio talk show guy who was certainly convinced that he had the "right" answer for what the church should be and do. (Now, I know... that's his job... but still, furthers my point that we all love to be right.)

Maybe Christians are the worst at this. From early on, most of us are taught that there is a right, and definitely a wrong. Actually, many wrongs. We recently heard the Bible referred to as "our only Rule Book". Ouch. Is that what it is? What about all the people who interpret it differently than you do? They have rules, too... just different from yours. In most cases (in the view of both parties) the other guy is wrong. And you're right.

This obsession with being right actually removes us from relationship with other people. We focus so much on having and knowing the "truth" that we must first verify that those with whom we associate are "with us", and "doctrinally correct", and if not, we must instruct them accordingly. There is always a bit of an angst as errors in thinking must not be tolerated. At least when it comes to Christianity.

And there's the rub. We have something (Christianity) that we need to protect, not Someone we want to introduce. An institution is defined. It has a Rule Book. It's easy (at least, sort of) to protect and preserve. A Person is not. Someone who is alive and dynamic (yet the same "yesterday, today and forever") is not easy to define, protect or preserve. Many have said, "You can't keep God in a box." Of course, they were probably referring to "the other guy's box"... but, I believe that statement is true.

For some reason I was reminded of a strange rule we have made up today. Perhaps it's due to hearing of marriages and other similar relationships dissolving for one reason or another. I remembered a "proof text" that many use for when it's "OK" to divorce. Remember when Jesus said that divorce was bad... unlesssss... the WIFE has been unfaithful. Don't you know that people (your intrepid author's former self included) use that to say that if there has been infidelity (perhaps especially from the woman???) that divorce is OK. And hold mightily to the words Jesus said previously that divorce is always bad. Which, I believe is correct, since Jesus seemed to say it as truth... but we leave out the "context" part where something that's bad might be better than something that's worse.

On many such occasions, we take the Rule Book and we bash it over each other's heads... saying my way is right. I got it from the Book! You must be wrong! (Even though our "adversary") is many times doing exactly the same thing. They just view it differently.

I am coming to understand that it's not my job to interpret the "Rules" for someone... for anyone else. My job is to be faithful to my understanding of what God wants from me, and then to love other people as I have been loved. Yes, sometimes love is "tough" and requires an uncomfortable confrontation - BETWEEN FRIENDS. It seems a confrontation is only effective (and then only sometimes) if relationship already exists. If not, why should the confronted change their "aberrant" behavior based on the "Rules" of a stranger?

The Bible is not a Rule Book. God doesn't even want us to live by Rules. The Rules were fulfilled by Jesus. It is finished. That doesn't mean it's not good to live as God intended us to... certainly God's law will last forever. BUT, we were never meant to keep the law... never able to do that. I've been reading Romans again, and Paul emphatically states that:

For no one is put right in God's sight by doing what the Law requires; what the Law does is to make us know that we have sinned. But now God's way of putting people right with himself has been revealed. It has nothing to do with law, even though the Law of Moses and the prophets gave their witness to it. God puts people right through their faith in Jesus Christ. God does this to all who believe in Christ, because there is no difference at all: everyone has sinned and is far away from God's saving presence. But by the free gift of God's grace all are put right with him through Christ Jesus, who sets them free. ... In this way God shows that he himself is righteous and that he puts right everyone who believes in Jesus. What, then, can we boast about? Nothing! And what is the reason for this? Is it that we obey the Law? No, but that we believe.

Taken from Rom 3:20-27, Good News Translation.

If you try to keep the Rules, and make others do the same, you'll only be butting your head up against a wall that won't ever be knocked down. We're meant (I think) to live in the fullness of a restored relationship with our Creator, and then to love the other Createds he puts around us. Rules work perhaps in a computer program... where everything is always (supposed to be) the same. But when people are involved, Rules almost never work. We're too unique. Principles, that can adjust to the context of a situation are more applicable, to be sure. But... maybe we could just make our only "rule" the rule to love everyone we meet, as we have been loved.

At least then the Rule Book would be a lot smaller. :-)

Stewing

There's some stuff stewing in Greg's Head this week... perhaps a bit longer... about two different ways of approaching life. This common theme seems to be running through my head, a thread of thought that permeates many conversations, events, and other happenings. Basically it comes down to whether we attempt to control our surroundings (including people around us), or whether we (as a general rule) live and respond to the moment. I've noticed it in the training of our children, in how we live life with God and the Church, and even on a personal level.

I won't elaborate now... my time is demanded elsewhere. (Gotta pay the bills!) :-)

Stay tuned... I look forward to fleshing out these thoughts and reading your responses.

Duplication

Last night as I cleaned up after a little family birthday party for my mother-in-law, I was listening to a podcast. The regular hosts were having a chat with a guy from Australia who has been through a few crazy cycles with the institution of the church. I believe once he was "let go" from his job as a pastor... which served as a wake-up call that "the church" (meaning, the system... the programmed institution) as it was had some pretty major flaws. So, he and his family avoided such a setting for something like nine years?

After all that time, a little Baptist church asked him to be their pastor. The church was very traditional, very Baptist, and he of course said, "No thanks!" But God said, take it. So they did. And slowly over the next few years they, along with that whole group of believers, worked themselves out of that system until nothing was left of that group. They are all still in contact, but all felt that God was leading them to something different... perhaps more free that what they had before.

As I listened, I started to think, "Man! Maybe that's what we should do! Could we do that??? Would I have the patience to go through helping a group of people de-structurize? But it sounds so cool! What a great story! I should try to do something like that...."

Within 5 seconds after I thought all of that, I realized how silly I was. :-)

What is this unquenchable drive to duplicate? Why is it that when we hear a story of some good thing that God did through another believer, it makes us think, "Ooo! I should do that too!" I realized that I was really just trying to do what the church has done with every current manifestation of itself (at least in this culture)... I was trying to DUPLICATE.

They spoke about this a bit later in the podcast I think. Or maybe that was just me, my thoughts, and God having a little chat in my head? For some reason we can't help but try to capture again a moment, or a season, or whatever where we saw God do something incredible. It must somehow be able to be duplicated, right??

Not necessarily.

Yes, God seemed to have led them to take that pastorate... and yes, in my eyes, it turned out pretty great. But so far, God is not leading me to do that... so if I were to do that, it would most likely be (in some way) a big flop. I would be trying to copy - in my own effort - something that God had done somewhere else, but was not asking me to do. THERE'S the point. God leads, we follow. It's not the other way around.

So, I'm not sure I can say that God is behind "Mega churches", but I am saying that we probably shouldn't be trying to copy every little thing they do. God wants to lead each of us, and even groups of us as the church wherever we are. He is our Shepherd, and we get to follow him ... daily. So, if today he asks me to do something, and it works fantastically, is very "fruitful", or whatever... tomorrow it's not my job to go out and do it again. It's my job to get up, listen to what he is asking me to do, and do that. It might be the same thing for another day, week.... maybe a year or two. OR, it might be something totally different. And that might be even harder! Who wants to leave something that's going so well? (Just ask Brett Favre!)

I really don't think formulas, systems, programs, methods, etc are helpful in the kingdom of God. From what I see in the Bible, and in the life of Jesus... he was not about that. He responded to each individual, and each situation, and each leading of God. Perhaps that's what we could do too. Listen to where he wants ME to go, and just follow.

I don't need to be making copies anymore.

The Nature of Sin

I have been reminded again lately of some things I was thinking through with God a couple years ago. I wrote about it here, here, and here. Probably a bit more around and about there, too. In fact, it was one of the five major sections of the first book I published from this blog, A Journey Shared.

Most recently, I was reminded as Jen and I were listening to last week’s episode of The God Journey. Overall it was a very good discussion of remembering that Jesus has been tempted in every way as we are, and that though we are sin-stained, he still welcomes us completely. We don’t have to feel shame, but instead, freedom to move forward and walk in step with God - no matter how many “bumps” we may experience along the way.

So, my whole perspective on sin has been slowly changing over the past several years. I like how Wayne Jacobsen describes it as a “disease” (see his book He Loves Me, or the audio collection Transitions. The idea that sin is something that can control us, and that can kill us - like where Paul said that it is “sin in me” that does... something. Where sin is a “force” or something other than just a single misdeed. Or multiple, as the case may be.

I do beleive it’s both. I can think of scripture that seems to refer to “sin” as an individual act that is contrary to the nature of God. But I do believe it’s more. I believe the thing Jesus defeated through the cross was not our individual acts, but the thing that controls and enslaves us.

But the discussion on the podcast seemed to keep going back to the idea that sin was our individual decisions. And, though I liked the general direction of the discussion, it seemed to be focused on the maintenance angle still. Where we can just clean up things here and there, and then... (implied) we can earn a better standing with God. They did not say that exactly, but the way I heard it... that mentality was still there.

How do we find the balance between both viewpoints? Where sin is a disease that can kill us, that Jesus forever defeated on the cross. And, where sin is also the choice I make in one individual situation to do something that is not in the will or nature of God, or take something that God has not given to me? Can they co-exist?

I actually believe they can. But when I heard the discussion, both Jen and I felt that the fellows speaking were just reverting to the old performance mentality of “getting it right” with God. To me, that negates grace.

So as you can see, I’m still processing. Just thought I’d take a moment and share my current thoughts with you. Discuss below if you like.

Are You Sure?

We managed to find a seat in front of the public TV in the Recreation Center of our little Pocono Resort. It was right outside one of the party rooms - which was in use by a Karaoke party this night - and was already populated by a few older people who were not that into the sing-fest. Oddly enough, the extra noise did not matter as there was nothing to hear from the television tonight. The audio was broken, and so we were stuck watching Game three with no commentators or other game sounds.

Overall, not too big a loss. :-)

We did attempt to pull up the dulcit tones of Rick Jeanneret’s voice on WGR550.com, but the stream was at least 2 minutes behind the live action, so that really didn’t work.

Once we managed to occupy the children, and really get to watch the game, I noticed that these were not the Sabres that I expected to see. I thought maybe we’d see the Sabres who came out firing on all cylinders in Game 5 against the Rangers. With something to prove. I thought we might see the Sabres who from early October had only one thing in the front of their collective mind: Winning the Stanley Cup.

Instead, I saw an Ottawa team who has had that same vision, that same mission, for a year or two more than our Sabres, and it was evident in every single battle for the puck. The Senators just wanted it more.

Now, there was a player or two who had that fire for the Blue & Gold. Daniel Briere was playing with some spunk tonight. Thomas Vanek has some moments, as did Derek Roy. Ryan Miller was sensational. But overall, the Sabres did not have what the Senators did. They were missing the “drive”. They were not on a mission.

So now here they are. They are down three games to none. If they lose one more, they go home. No Stanley Cup for the team who won the most games in the regular season. No championship trophy for the team who scored the most goals, and led the points race in the East from wire to wire. Even after such a fantastic season, they are only one game away from elimination.

But they’re still a game away.

You see, everyone has all but declared Ottawa the victors in this series. Well, most everyone. Lindy Ruff has not. He would like to add the 2007 Buffalo Sabres to the list of teams that have overcome that insurmountable 3-0 series deficit. And he said so in the press conference following tonight’s game. But really who can expect such an outcome? Ottawa only needs one more win, and so far, they’re a fairly easy 3 for 3.

But they still have to win one more.

I could be a homer here, and just say that the Sabres are going to win, “cause they’re the best!” But I won’t. I think that the most likely outcome of a 3-0 series is a loss by the team with the zero. However, I’d like to point out that although in 150 attempts, only 2 teams have ever come back from 3-0 to win a series. 1942, 1975, and ... 2007? (If you do the SAT logical pattern thing... we’d have to wait till next year. BUT... we’re close enough, aren’t we???) :-)

If the Sabres come out Wednesday night and say to themselves, “All we need to do is win this one game,” then perhaps they can. They have done it before. Ottawa is good, but no one is unbeatable. You still have to play the games. And then, after they beat them once, there is a bit of confidence... “Hey, we did it once... perhaps we can do it again!” And if they do, then they have won two in a row, and the momentum builds.

All it takes are a few good bounces, and this “dead” series can take a serious up-swing.

Somehow we get into this pattern of “knowing” what the outcome of a series or a game will be. I do understand it. I have been watching these guys, too. Ottawa just wants it more right now. And it shows. But... the Sabres have wanted it since losing to Carolina in Game Seven of the Eastern Conference Finals last year, too. Perhaps they rediscover that mission, that passion, that drive. Perhaps they become the team on a mission.

Point is, we really don’t know until they play the game. The series is over at four wins, not three. And I hope the Sabres come out playing like that. They are very capable of doing so, as long as they don’t listen to - or, especially, believe the hype.

As the Sabres have been completely amazing this season with impossible comebacks, incredible goals, improbable heroes... I have been saying to my boys all year long that we are “witnessing history”. My thought has always been that this team is so good, it will be difficult to pry the Stanley Cup from their hungry hands. But now that history appears to have been re-written. It looks like the ending will not turn out how I hoped/expected it would.

Or will it?

What kind of history would the Sabres make if they become the third team to win a series after being down 3-0??? I would be more of a prophet than I know! THAT would be some serious history! And, would advance the Sabres to the cup. And would likely be an emotional catapult lifting them to eventually hoisting the Stanley Cup over their deserving heads.

That would just be awesome.

But I’m getting ahead of myself, as I have mentioned that we are prone to doing. :-) The Sabres just need to play one game at a time, and really just focus on that one. Not what they have done, or what Ottawa has done, or what might happen “If”. Just go out and play. Win this game, and we’ll see what comes next.

How fitting though, if this team could possibly do the impossible. That has been their story all year long. Amazing comeback after comeback. Well, there is one staring them in the face, and the stakes are higher than ever.

Let’s just see how “done” these Sabres really are.

Rubber-Necking, Heroes, and We Just Don't Get It

There was an auto accident right in front of our house today. Thankfully it did not involve any of us. Actually, it only involved one person - the driver of one vehicle, who collided with a parked car on the side of the road. But this story involves several different folks, and a peek into our human nature.

First there is the driver. For whatever reason she was obviously distracted, and not paying attention to the road. It's a 30MPH road in front of our house... close quarters, with cars, people and other random things to watch for. She missed the car that was parked right in her path. Well, and then she did not miss it.

SCREEEEECH --- BOOM!

I jumped from my chair and saw the accident out my 3rd story office window. Two cars... one driver. "Is the other driver unconcious? Or... dead???" I thought. The driver of the first car was pretty shaky, but managed to get out of the car without a problem. She did look very emotionally shaken up, and was holding her right wrist. (Later it was her left, so.. that was a bit confusing.) She was a middle-aged woman... but did not seem to have been in this position before. Crying, and obviously shaken.

Then there is me. I was in the middle of stuff that, compared to such a traumatic incident, seems a bit trivial. But, I was in the middle of it. I was working on trying to get some PHP and Javascript code to play nicely together. But my perplexing task was interrupted suddenly, rudely, by a loud CRASH outside my window. I got up, saw what happened... saw another guy come running to help... and was about to pick up the phone to call 911 when I heard that same guy say "M'am, please call an ambulence." I figured he wasn't talking to me... so I was just going to sit down.

Then I felt like a heel. How could I just sit down? Someone was really hurting right outside my house, and I was going to try and figure out my PHP puzzle... as if nothing happened?

Needless to say, after only a few seconds of debate in my own head... I got up and went downstairs to see how I could help.

To my surprise... Jen was there... and she was the "M'am" that the dude had asked to phone for an ambulence! (She was gone on some errands last I knew... so that was a bit of a shock. After a quick, disoriented conversation with her where I found out she had only moments early returned from her errands, I quickly was very thankful that she had not been in the street for this woman to run into.

Very thankful.

And, a bit impressed as my wife had jumped right in to a crazy situation... helping where she could help. Nice one, Jen! :-)

So, with the situation seemingly "under control", I did go back to my office to resume my scripting work.

But, it was hard to focus. After a few moments, I arose from my chair to check on the progress. This time I saw a few more people.

First there was the hero. This was the somewhat athletic-looking guy who hurried to the scene within moments of it happening. He took charge right away and was compassionate to the woman who was driving, and equally in control and helpful to others who were attempting to help. He was definitely the on-the-spot leader.

Then there were the police. They came in and had a similar leadership, but actually... their leadership was due mostly to the clothes they wore. Not that they were not good at their job, or not helpful. They were definitely that. It was just a bit different than the first guy to arrive.

Then there was the main "victim". The owner of the other vehicle. At this point, as the driver of the car that did the damage was sitting on the side of the road in obvious physical and emotional pain, being tended to by the ambulence crew who had just arrived, one of the police officers was assessing the damage to this lady's car. In the brief seconds that I saw her, she had two or maybe three very visible reactions of anger and disgust. Seemingly aimed at the incompetent driver who had just dented her bumper!

This was the saddest picture of human nature today. Our amazing capacity to miss what is happening around us. We are so good at seeing every event for how it affects us. Somehow, though another human being was clearly hurting only a few dozen feet from her, this car owner could only think of the damage done to her car, and I guess, what that meant to her. I can't know her heart, but her body language was pretty clear.