Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Just In Time for Mother's Day

First published May 15, 2009 in The Daily Sentinel.



Last week, an article about motherhood caught my attention. Maybe it’s because we just finished celebrating Mother’s Day last Sunday, maybe it’s because the article indicates that American society has radically changed its expectations of motherhood and fatherhood.

In figures released by the US National Center for Health Statistics, four of every 10 babies born in 2007 were born to single women. In babies born to moms between ages 20 and 24, the number of babies born out of wedlock increased to 6 of every 10. Sixty percent of babies born to a mom in her early 20s – more than half – are going home to households without the traditional dual-parents-united-in-marriage structure.

The article’s sociologists (and perhaps the writer of the article itself) seemed to be gushing over the finding. Here’s how the story concludes:

Some experts said the trend represents positive changes for some women – women are less likely to be shunned if they have children by themselves or to be forced to give their children up for adoption.

“We’ve seen a transformation of social norms," said Rosanna Hertz, a professor of sociology at Wellesley College. "Women can have children on their own and it’s not going to destroy your employment and it’s not going to mean that you’ll be made a pariah by the community.”

Until recently (say the last 30 years or so), the concept of the two-parent household – a mother and father married to one another with children born from that marriage – was commonly recognized as the best context in which children could be raised. Unfortunately, that best context was sometimes the façade behind which much ugliness was contained. Spousal abuse, incest, alcoholism and drug addiction were all kept out of view behind the two-parent family pretext of perfection.

As our society grew increasingly suspicious of institutionalism in all its forms (remember the saying, “never trust anyone over 40”?), the institution of marriage also began to falter. Divorce rates skyrocketed, and so by the late 1970s, a majority of children in America grow up in a home in which at least one parental figure was NOT the child’s natural parent.

With so many homes made up of divorced adults remarrying other divorced adults, our vocabulary changed. No longer called “broken” homes, such households became “blended families.” Today’s 20 and 30-year olds are the product of that change. Often miserable in their blended families, those kids vowed that they would not repeat their parent’s (and step-parent’s) mistakes. If marriage is so miserable, their logic goes, then let’s throw away marriage completely and just live together.

And so we are now in an era when parenting and marriage are no longer linked together. I know that there are many people – probably including that professor from Wellesley College – who consider this a good thing. Don’t count me as one of them. I think this is a very sad development in our society, and time will only tell what the results of it are in the long term.

Yes, the 1950ish ideal portrayed by “Leave it to Beaver” and “Ozzie and Harriet” are probably nostalgic wishful-thinking of a time that never really existed, but I am still convinced that the best context for child-rearing is a home in which a man and woman make a lifelong commitment to one another, and they bring children into the world from that commitment.

Other studies, which often don’t receive much publicity, have shown that the traditional marriage continues to be the most conducive environment for successfully raising children. For example, the majority of children whose parents do not get or stay married experience at least one year (often more) of poverty. Boys whose parents divorced or never married, are two to three times more likely to end up in jail as adults. Finally, children whose parents get and stay married are healthier and much less likely to suffer mental illness, including depression and teen suicide.

As a Christian, I see marriage as something more than just the best context for raising kids. I also see it as a reflection of God’s desire for us to be in a specific type of relationship with one another. In a way that I cannot adequately explain, marriage is God’s idea; and it somehow reflects the relationship between God and us. Several times in the Gospels, Jesus makes an analogy between God’s kingdom and the bride and groom. Jesus is the groom, and those who follow him are his bride. In the book of Revelation, the church is described as the bride of Christ, “beautifully adorned” in Rev. 21:2.

Genesis 2 is seen as the theological foundation for marriage when God announces, “It is not good for the man to be alone, I will make a helper for him. (Gen 2:18) And so God created woman out of the man, and “for this reason, a man will leave his father and mother and be united with his wife, and they will become one flesh.” (Gen 2:24).

My older daughter will turn 20 later this year. I pray that she does not join the statistical majority and choose to have a baby without first laying the foundation of Biblically oriented marriage. I want the best for her – God’s absolute best – and not what our society seems to have settled on as adequate or easier. If we want God’s absolute best, we must cooperate with God to make it happen. It takes work: dedication, commitment, patience, and especially forgiveness.

And the good news is this: even when we blow it, God can take our mistakes and turn them into a new best. So even if you ARE one of the six in ten, God won’t shun you. And neither will I. But carefully, prayerfully, consider what is best for you and your child for the long term. And if you are not already a parent, please carefully, prayerfully, consider your actions and attitudes before they lead you to parenthood.

Every home – even the traditional mother-father-married-for-life one – is a broken home. But God is here to fix them. Will you let Him fix yours?

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Disappearing Brands, Labels, and More

First published May 7, 2009 in The Daily Sentinel.




The US automotive industry is in turmoil. Chrysler is in bankruptcy and preparing to be at least partially merged with Italy’s Fiat. And GM has announced the elimination of Pontiac as an icon of American performance automobiles. The latter development has caught my attention.

As soon as 2010, Pontiacs will no longer be produced. For me, a car-oriented male, this is tragic! As a high schooler, I used to drool over the Pontiac Firebirds and Trans Ams at the Pontiac dealership. They were as untouchable for me as the far more exotic and expensive Porsches and Lamborghinis, but not for others. Several guys in my school drove them, and they were the envy of the rest of us. We knew guys who drove those cars somehow were way cooler than the rest of us.

But Pontiac is simply the latest major brand to fall in the storied history of American automobiles. After 107 years, Oldsmobile died in 2004; Plymouth went away in 2001. Older names have also disappeared. DeSoto was a Chrysler brand from 1929 through 1961. Packard and Studebaker were other once popular car brands that died in the late 1950s and 60s.

So this isn’t the first time the American automobile industry has gone through significant change, but it may be the most dramatic. Here are some of the numbers for GM:
• Hourly employees: 1991 = 304,000; 2008 = 63,700; by 2011 = 38,000
• Salaried employees: 1991 = 91,000; 2008 = 29,000; by 2011 = 15,000 or less
• Dealers: 2000 = 8,138, 2008 = 6,450; by 2011 = 3,605

In just 20 years, GM will shrink by more than half (sometimes by much more) in every measurement. Compared to how GM once dominated the American industrial scene across all sectors – not just in automobiles – this is even more remarkable. The old saying of “what’s good for GM is good for America” may not necessarily be so anymore.

As much as we may bemoan the downfall of the traditional American automobile manufacturing base, it is not the only area where significant downsizing has occurred. America’s religious landscape has also changed tremendously since the 1950s. Just looking at one denomination – which happens to be my own – the United Methodist Church has declined even more than GM.

The American Methodist Episcopal Church was formed in 1784 following the withdrawal of the Anglican Church from America in the aftermath of the American Revolution. By the close of the 19th century, nearly half the population of the United States was associated with a church in the Methodist tradition. In the 20th century, however, Methodism began to wane. By the time of the merger of the Evangelical United Brethren Church and the Methodist Church in 1968, there were 11 million members in the USA. In 2007, the latest year with figures, the US membership had declined to 7.9 million, while global membership was just over 12 million.

What this means is that the Methodist movement is losing ground in America even more than GM, Chrysler or Ford. One researcher made the comment that the US Methodist movement would soon revert to its 1825 size, and perhaps diminish to the small numbers that launched the movement in 1784.

But the United Methodist Church isn’t the only church with shrinkage problems. All mainline Christian denominations – Lutheran, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, etc. – are diminishing populations. Even the Southern Baptist Church reversed its trend of growth in the past decade. Meanwhile, the Roman Catholic Church is growing only in areas where Hispanic migration has increased. Non-Hispanic Catholics are declining as rapidly as the Protestant churches’ populations.

A recent report from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life shows that 44% of the adult US population has abandoned the faith in which they were raised. Nearly half of us are no longer in the church we went to as children. Some have switched churches, but even more have become completely unaffiliated with ANY church or faith group.

I conclude from all of this that Christianity is as much danger of collapse as the American car industry! People aren’t loyal to brands of cars, and they seem to have less loyalty to brands of faith. So the question, then, becomes this: what should we do about it?

People in favor of strict secularism would say, “Do nothing! This is what’s supposed to happen.” Europe is already a secular society – except where significant immigration of Muslims have occurred in parts of France, Germany, and England. Conflicts between Muslim law (known as Sharia) and secular governmental law are increasing.

But as a Christian, I think this is a terrible trend - and we Christians MUST do something about it! But what we do is almost less important than HOW we do it. I am as turned off by radical, guilt-driven, pushy evangelism tactics as anyone else. We may think we can guilt people into belief, or that we can (literally speaking) scare the hell out of them, but those are not effective motivations for true Christian transformation. People can be scared into short-term change. Take the flurry of masking by folks scared of swine flu, for example. But long-term change cannot be driven by fear or guilt.

Pontiac is dying because GM failed to maintain its brand image. They lost their core reason to exist. I think Christianity in American is doing the same thing. We’ve allowed ourselves to become characterized as either liberal “anything goes” or conservative “look just like us” people. On one side, we’ve gotten lost in “love” that has become syrupy sweet and non-nutritious. On the other side, we’ve gotten lost in separatism and insistence on “righteous behavior” before even getting to the One who can bring us righteousness.

But is it too late for Christianity to recover? Are we doomed to join Pontiac, Studebaker, and Oldsmobile in the dustbins of history? I don’t think so. We are in the midst of the Easter season, and Easter is all about Resurrection! Maybe we need to get this close to death as a faith group in America in order for God to give us really new life! This time not based on cultural expectations but on relevant, radical and reliable faith in Jesus Christ!

Monday, May 4, 2009

Believing is Seeing

Ai-yai-yai! Has it really been a month since I posted!

Here's the latest article from
The Daily Sentinel. Maybe at some point I will post the "back issues."



First published in The Daily Sentinel on Friday, April 24, 2009



In The Santa Clause, the first movie with Tim Allen as Santa, there’s a scene in which Tim’s character – Scott Calvin – cannot believe what he’s seeing in Toyland at the North Pole. Judy, the wise elf, tells him, “Seeing isn’t believing; believing is seeing.”

While I don’t want to get into a debate about the reality of Toyland at the North Pole, I think Judy makes a very profound statement – especially as we consider the implications of Jesus’ resurrection during this season of Easter. There is a lot of debate regarding the historical accuracy and validity of Jesus’ resurrection. As I wrote last week, historian Bart Ehrman doesn’t believe that the resurrection can be taken as an actual historical event. He claims that the question of Jesus’ resurrection is not an historical question but rather a theological one.

Personally, I think it is both. But the emphasis is rightly on the theological answer. Believing is seeing. If I believe in the resurrection, then I can see the resurrection. If I do not believe it, then I cannot see it.

That seemed to be the case with the disciples of Jesus, too. They were seeing, but not sure how to believe what they were seeing. In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus came to the disciples and went out of his way to prove they were seeing a real person – in the flesh – and not some kind of apparition or ghost.

“Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, ‘Peace be with you.’ They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. He said to them, ‘Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds? Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.’

“When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, ‘Do you have anything here to eat?’ They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their presence.

“He said to them, ‘This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.’ Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, ‘This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things.’” (Luke 24:36-48)


The scars on Jesus’ hands and feet weren’t enough to convince the disciples that He was real. So he asked for something to eat. He got a very ordinary food from them – broiled fish. And he ate it! Ghosts, even if they are real, don’t eat – they don’t have stomachs. But Jesus did.

Once they believed, they were ready to see. And so Jesus opened their eyes and their minds to understand all the prophecies regarding him from the Hebrew Scriptures. And he finished with “you are witnesses of these things.” In other words, now their believing has given them the ability to truly see the truth of Jesus.

Two thousand or so years later, we are less convinced. Even those who claim the name Christian aren’t quite sure what to do with Jesus – especially a resurrected, physically real Jesus. It’s easier to keep Jesus on the cross than out of the grave. It’s easier to relate to a baby in a manger than to the one whose “name is above every name.” We want a Jesus that we can keep at a safe distance, not one who can penetrate walls and locked doors, move instantly from place to place, and who visibly demonstrates God’s power over all creation – even death.

C.S. Lewis captured this idea in his fantasy series set in the land of Narnia. The first book published (and first film released in 2005) was called The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The “Lion” od the title is Aslan, and he is the Narnian Jesus. We first learn about Aslan with Mr. and Mrs. Beaver describing him to Lucy, Edmund, Susan and Peter:

“Is—is he a man?” asked Lucy.

“Aslan a man!” said Mr. Beaver sternly. “Certainly not. I tell you he is the King of the wood and son of the great Emperor-beyond-the-Sea. Don’t you know who is the King of the Beasts? Aslan is a lion—THE Lion, the great Lion.”

“Ooh!” said Susan, “I’d thought he was a man. Is he—quite safe? I shall feel rather nervous meeting a lion.”

“That you will, dearie, and no mistake,” said Mrs. Beaver. “If there’s anyone who can appear before Aslan without their knees knocking, they’re either braver than most or else just silly.”

“Then he isn’t safe?” said Lucy.

“Safe?” said Mr. Beaver. “Don’t you hear what Mrs. Beaver tells you? Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”

Throughout the Narnian tales, Aslan is never a tame lion – he is never “safe.” And neither is Jesus, despite our best efforts to make him so. When we come face-to-face with the truth of a resurrected Jesus, we realize that we, too, have our knees knocking.

What will Jesus ask me to do? What will Jesus ask me to change in my life? What can I risk in order to follow Him? Answering these questions honestly is very dangerous. And so we often don’t answer them without first taming them down. We rationalize away our worst fears and Jesus’ strongest demands. We see Jesus as we want to see him rather than see him as he is.

As Lewis writes, “People who have not been in Narnia sometimes think that a think cannot be good and terrible at the same time. If the children ever thought so, they were cured of it now. For when they tried to look at Aslan’s face, they just caught a glimpse of the golden mane and the great, royal, solemn, overwhelming eyes; and they found they couldn’t look at him and went all trembly. At last Peter realized that it was up to him. He drew his sword and raised it to the salute. He advanced to the Lion and said: ‘We have come—Aslan.’

I ask you to risk something this Easter season. Do what Peter did. Be willing to give yourself fully to the Resurrected Jesus and discover how dangerous—and Good—he is. Believing really IS seeing!

Monday, March 30, 2009

Meltdowns Require Bailouts

First published Friday, Feb. 15, 2009 in The Daily Sentinel


Still terribly behind in posting my articles from the newspaper onto this blog. Please check the side-navigation under "Recent Posts" if you've missed something that you'd like to see.

And feedback would be very nice, too!



This week, leaders from the House and Senate gathered together to finalize a new economic stimulus package. Almost $800 billion will be pumped into the U.S. economy, creating 3.5 million jobs, according to the Obama Whitehouse. But that’s not what I want to talk about this week.

I came home from a two-day pastors educational retreat on Wednesday night hoping to relax. I’m naturally an introvert, so after 48-or-so-hours being “on” with people, I needed some downtime to recharge my batteries. I didn’t get it.

We had accumulated over two feet of snow during January, and over the past several days, it all finally melted. Then on Wednesday, we got nearly two-and-one-half inches of rain. The snow meltdown saturated the ground. The rain had nowhere to go – except into my basement.

I told my wife I had better check the basement around 8 p.m. since I’d heard the sump pump working non-stop. With all that water, I thought there might be a little seepage into the laundry room, since that’s where the pump is located. I turned on the light in the stairwell, and thought, “That looks a little damp.”

I got to the bottom of the stairs and realized it was more than a little damp – it was downright flooded! More than three inches deep across the entire basement. Our meltdown now required a bailout in the worst way – immediately!

I know living around the Ohio River, basement flooding is not a new phenomenon. Most folks have figured out what to do to minimize the damage, and how to recover quickly when water gets in. And living in Racine, our parsonage basement flooded several times. Those Racine floods were also rain-induced. But we finally figured out that the problem in Racine had less to do with the amount of rain and more to do with a poorly sealed screw-hole for the widow wells.

In some ways, the Racine basement floods were worse because they all came into my older daughter’s basement bedroom. So we had to deal with carpet and furniture. On the other hand, the waters remained contained to one corner of the basement, so all the rest of the basement stayed dry. All our storage boxes and buckets stayed out of harm’s way.

Not so with our flooding this week in Perrysburg. Although our current basement does not have any finished-out living space, we did have quite a few cardboard boxes on the floor, and the waters were EVERYWHERE! Nothing was spared.

I’m sure some people reading this are shaking their heads and thinking, “you should have known better than to put cardboard on your floor.” We did think about that when we first moved into the house last summer. “Does the basement ever flood?” we asked the trustee chair. “Not that I’m aware of,” he said. “That sump pump does a great job taking care of water trying to seep into the basement.”

When the house had new gutters installed last fall, we changed the way water flowed from the house. Before, the gutters emptied directly into the sump pump; now they deflected water at the surface. I thought all of those measures would protect us. Now, I can only imagine how badly we would have flooded if the rain gutters still went to the sump.

So instead of a nice, quiet evening, my wife and I were up until midnight moving boxes and emptying the worst of them in hopes of salvaging their contents. We filled a 60-gallon trashcan with stuff that was clearly beyond repair, and filled every flat surface with the rest. Fortunately, little of the trashed stuff was of great value – financially or sentimentally. But going through all of those possessions reminded me of several scripture passages.

“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” (Matthew 6:19-21)

Jesus said those words during his “Sermon on the Mount” as recorded in Matthew’s gospel. And I thought about how floods can destroy every bit as effectively as moths or rust. And I also thought about how obsessed with our past we can often be. Most of what I pulled up was stuff from more than 20 years ago: high school and college mementos, old record albums, artwork that I drew “back in the day.” My wife’s school materials were more recent, but even they had been sitting in boxes mostly unused for more than five years.

When we store up treasures in heaven, we are not obsessing with our past, but anticipating our future. I don’t really need my collection of ELO, Kansas and Styx albums, nor do I need that trophy I received for being “Outstanding Junior High Boy” at Choir Camp in 1979. I would much rather have the “trophy” for significant ministry waiting for me when I turn heavenward. What happens right now in my relationships is much more valuable than what happened then. Even though I’ve recently re-established connections with many of those friends from high school via Facebook, they aren’t as important as the person I visit in the hospital this afternoon.

So my lesson from this bailout following the meltdown is this: pay attention to the present rather than accumulate junk from the past. Be willing to let go of what was then in order to anticipate what is to come. And finally, stuff is simply stuff.

“Why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.” (Matthew 6:28-33)

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Gambling (on) Losses

First published Friday, Feb. 6, 2009 in The Daily Sentinel


I've gotten terribly behind in posting my articles from the newspaper onto this blog. So there is going to be a flurry of updates over the next several days as I attempt to get current. Please check the side-navigation under "Recent Posts" if you've missed something that you'd like to see.


And feedback would be very nice, too!


The economy continues to make headlines. Unemployment in Ohio is over 7.5%, and many experts predict that will quickly climb to 10%. State and local governments are wrestling with how to balance budgets when revenues (taxes) are down while service demands (expenses) are up. The optimists are looking at that proverbial glass and asking, “Where did it all go?” while the pessimists are saying, “See, I told you so.” Who is going to rescue us from this mess?

Penn National Corporation rides to the rescue! In case you don’t know who that is, Penn National owns Argosy Casino in Indiana – just outside Cincinnati – and it spent $36 million to kill the proposed single casino constitutional amendment on last November’s ballot because it didn’t have had any ownership in the new casino and it didn’t want the competition. Ohio voters defeated that proposal, along with the last four attempts to expand gambling in Ohio (including two proposals made by Penn).

The people seem to have clearly spoken: we don’t want casino gambling in Ohio. However, now that our economy is in the tank, Penn National and other casino groups think Ohioans are willing to compromise. The Cincinnati Inquirer recently reported: “To boost state revenues, some state legislators propose expanded gambling. In spite of his longtime opposition to casino gambling, [Governor] Strickland said it would be foolish for him to ignore gambling ideas that might ease budget woes.”

“The state has been in bad financial condition for the last eight years,” said Senator Bill Seitz (R-Cincinnati) to the Toledo Blade. “I foresaw this eight years ago. You either raise taxes, cut spending, or expand gambling in Ohio. For me, it's an easy choice.” Seitz is one of the gambling industry’s biggest supporters in the State House. He thinks gambling is the easy choice. That must be music to Penn National’s ears.

Ohio government officials are not alone in considering gambling. The Associated Press recently reported that proposals to allow or expand slots or casinos are percolating in at least 14 states. “Analysts say the latest round of gambling initiatives are noteworthy in volume and ambition – a sign that the industry aims to capitalize on states’ badly bruised economies. ‘From the gambling industry’s point of view, this is their big chance,’ said Earl Grinols, an economics professor at Baylor University who specializes in gambling.”

This is their “big chance,” huh? Sounds like the gambling industry is gambling with our economic troubles to line their own pockets even further. In exchange, they promise economic miracles: thousands of new jobs, increased tax revenues, support for our schools, hospitals, and emergency response teams. Almost sounds too good to be true!

Maybe it is too good to be true. What’s the economy look like where gambling is most famous – Las Vegas? Foreclosure rates highest in the nation. Housing values declining by 50%. Unemployment up significantly as casinos lay off wait staff, dealers, valets, hotel clerks, cleaning crews, etc., after their profits fell by two-thirds in 2008. Seven gaming companies defaulted on $13 billion in loans last year. That’s a lot of bad news from “Sin City.”

Tom Gray, a field director for StopPredatoryGambling.org: “We’ve got gambling in 48 states, and you’d think if it worked, you wouldn’t have budget problems or education problems.”

Here in Ohio, Governor Strickland allowed the expansion of Keno gambling through the Ohio Lottery. Expected to generate $73 million in state revenue in its first year, Keno is currently projected to make only $25 million.

And where does the $25 million come from? Mostly the poor, marginally employed folks who often see all forms of gambling as a ticket to escape poverty. The truth of the matter is that gambling tends to mostly affect those who can least afford it. Rev. John Edgar, head of the United Methodist Church of Ohio’s anti-gambling task force summarized this well: “It is illogical to say that you're not going to increase taxes but are going to increase gambling revenue. Fundamentally, gambling – when it's state-authorized and taxed – functions like a regressive tax on the poor.”

As a former United Methodist minister, Governor Strickland knows all of this. He has long been an opponent of gambling. So I hope that he will not lay his principles on the altar of economic pragmatism. Gambling with Ohio’s future should not be on the table – no matter how bad the economy seems to be.

Thursday, March 19, 2009

The Elusive Search for Safety

First published on Friday, January 23, 2009 in The Daily Sentinel


I've gotten terribly behind in posting my articles from the newspaper onto this blog. So there is going to be a flurry of updates over the next several days as I attempt to get current. Please check the side-navigation under "Recent Posts" if you've missed something that you'd like to see.

And feedback would be very nice, too!



With all of the attention paid to President Obama’s inauguration this week, other stories have understandably taken a back seat. I’ve seen lots of debate on the effectiveness, merit and impact of the various prayers offered in the inauguration. I’ve seen many words of advice to our new president from people from all across the political spectrum. But what has really raised the hairs on the back of my neck this week is peanut butter.

Did you know that peanut butter is suspected to be a potential killer? Kroger, Meijer, Kellog’s, and other companies are recalling their peanut butter cookies, candies, ice cream and other snacks because the peanut butter and peanut paste used to make them may be tainted with salmonella. Even pet food is now embroiled in the mess. PetSmart’s Grreat Choice Dog Biscuits are no longer such a great choice for your pet. And I didn’t even realize that dog biscuits were made with peanut butter.

This situation is quite scary for me – I love peanut butter! My favorite snack food cookie (admittedly a poor substitute for the homemade variety) is the Nutter Butter. Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups are my favorite chocolate/peanut butter candy. And there’s nothing better than a peanut butter/banana shake!

Blame the whole mess on one peanut butter factory in Blakely, Georgia. According to officials from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Peanut Corp. of America’s plant has proven to be the source of the Salmonella Typhimurium strain. The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday reported more than 480 people became sick across 43 states – all from one factory.

That just goes to show how inter-related our entire economy and food chain is across this nation. Because the Peanut Corp. peanut butter and peanut paste is a core ingredient for many other food companies’ different products, the effect is magnified tremendously. People have been worried about “Mad Cow” disease – but now its “polluted peanut butter” that’s the real problem.

Everyone wants to live in a safe world. And despite the Cold War, Vietnam, the oil crisis, and high inflation, we pretty much felt safely cocooned – until September 11, 2001. Since then, everything has changed. We seem to have no limits now when it comes to the elusive search for security.

A new federal bureaucracy – the Homeland Security Agency – now forces us to take off our shoes when flying in airplanes. Two wars – in Afghanistan and Iraq – are supposed to make us safer from terrorism. More than $850 billion in federal aid is supposed to keep our financial systems from melting down. The “Big Three” U.S. auto makers are in dire straits – along with most other industries – so that millions of us wonder whether our jobs will exist next week. And now, even peanut butter is not safe.

All of these problems could depress me and keep me from sleeping at night. But they don’t. And the reason is not that I ignore them most of the time, but rather, because I know that even should the worst happen, things will get better.

The Apostle Paul knew about the elusive search for safety, and he chose not to pursue it: “I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. I can do everything through him who gives me strength.” (Philippians 4:11-13)

Jesus, too, refuted the need to search for safety: “Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?” (Matthew 6:26-27)

I believe that we should take precautions against bad things happening. Increasing our national security is a legitimate function of government – whether that’s economic security, military security, or disease prevention and control. But I want to caution us against becoming so afraid of what MIGHT happen that we no longer let ANYTHING happen.

Safety is elusive. We can never be absolutely safe and still be absolutely alive! And that’s what both Jesus and Paul are trying to tell us. So maybe you don’t eat a Keebler cookie this week, but why not bake up a fresh batch of peanut butter bars and share them with your friends? After all, you only live once!

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

What's in a Dream?

First published on Friday, January 16, 2009 in The Daily Sentinel.


I've edited the entry below from the printed version only in the reference to dates since the original published date in the paper and the posted date on this blog.



Last Thursday was the actual birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., but the nation remembered him officially on Monday: MLK Day. If he had not been assassinated on April 4, 1968, King would be 80 years old. But because he was killed at age 39, he has been forever immortalized as a young dreamer – one who dreamed of better days to come.

His most famous speech – “I Have a Dream” – was delivered on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC on August 29, 1963. That was nearly three years before I was born (so, yes, many of you can shake your heads at the follies of youth), yet, King’s speech is as much a part of my consciousness as those who heard it live.

“I have a dream … that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’ I have a dream … that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream … that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream today…!”


Many see the inauguration of Barak Obama as the 44th president of the United States on Tuesday as the fulfillment of King’s dream. No matter the color of one’s skin, the political orientation of one’s beliefs, or where one lives in this nation – Tuesday was an emotional day. The installation of the first president of African descent is indeed history-making. Given the long conflict for civil rights, that Tuesday recognizes just how far we have come in 46 years since King made his “Dream” speech.

And yet, Obama’s presidency has all the ingredients for a nightmare: a faltering global economy, the ongoing war against terrorism, a Palestinian-Israeli conflict at heights not seen in decades, and a deeply divided America. To illustrate that last point, I recently received two emails. One had a link to a website that purported to prove President-elect Obama is the Anti-Christ described in the New Testament. The other email linked to a website that claimed Obama is the one to “prepare the way of the Lord” a la John the Baptist.

What is it about our dreaming that we feel the need to invoke religious rhetoric around this presidency? Indeed, the entire civil rights movement has been wrapped co-equally in the America flag and in the Bible by people on both sides of the issue. I understand why King used biblical language in his speeches – he was a Baptist preacher. When he said “we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream,” he was alluding to Amos 5:24. That’s natural for a preacher. But what about all the non-preachers?

Too often people today are invoking the Bible as extremism – stretching the Scriptures past the breaking point of meaning – to justify a decidedly unchristian ideology. President Obama is not the return of the prophet Elijah, the long-awaited Messiah, nor the Anti-Christ. He is a man elected to be president of this nation, and as a man is capable of both great good and great evil.

Our dreams today should be everything that King dreamed for – and more. We should dream that extremists of all varieties and flavors would learn to tone down their rhetoric, to truly try to understand others, and to seek a way of living peaceably together.

I believe human effort cannot bring about the kingdom of God described in both the Old and New Testaments. “Peace on earth and goodwill towards men” is God’s activity – not ours. However, that doesn’t excuse us from the responsibility of TRYING to bring peace on earth and goodwill towards all. Faith is about doing what seems impossible. James 1:22-25, and 2:14-17 says what I’m trying to say – but better:

“Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror, and after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. But the man who looks intently in the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard but doing it – he will be blessed in what he does.

“What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such a faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.”


May your dreams be action-oriented, faith-filled, and dedicated to bringing God’s kind of peace and goodwill to all. With God’s help, it can be done!

Saturday, January 17, 2009

Reflections on the Year that Was

First published Friday, January 2, 2009 in The Daily Sentinel


I've allowed myself to get behind in posting to this blog again.... By the time we get to mid-January, we're supposed to have already put the previous year behind us, but I think this article is still timely - because we all have to deal with death.



In a lot of ways, I couldn’t wait to see 2008 put behind me. If I were to sum up the past year in one word, this would be it: death. I don’t mean to sound morbid, but that is what I experienced too many times last year.

First, both of my wife’s grandmothers passed away in the spring – within four weeks of one another. That meant two almost back-to-back trips to Texas. The first time, we drove straight through in both directions. It just about killed me.

In between those deaths, we lost a dear saint in the Racine United Methodist Church: Lois Bell. Lois was an incredible woman in more ways than can be described. When her end came near, I was the one to tell her that her life was almost gone. I will never forget the look on her face as I explained to her that her kidneys had failed and there was nothing more the doctors could do. Lois had a momentary look of fear and sadness, but almost immediately her face cleared and became peaceful. She understood, and she had complete confidence that she was going on to a better place.

In May, the entire Meigs County community was shocked by the deaths of Julie and Julia Campbell. I had never anticipated having to deal pastorally with a murder-suicide in my congregation. It was an extreme challenge for many of us to reconcile our experience of “happy Julie” with the kind of depression from which she must have suffered to make her decisions that ended two lives.

The personal shocks of unexpected deaths did not end there. My wife and I learned in June that a family who had been dear to us back in Texas had been killed in a freak automobile accident – on their way home from church, no less. A car travelling more than 100 miles-per-hour ran a red light and creamed into the Harts’ van at window level. The Harts, their daughter and two foster-daughters, were killed instantly.

Death is the end of one stage in life, and the beginning of another. Sometimes death comes in forms less than terminal. I experienced this lesser form of change when moving out of Meigs County to begin my new appointment in the Toledo area. It was a kind of “death” for me as my ministry focus changed. In many ways, it was a bit like dying – knowing that there are many whom I will probably never see again.

I learned this fall about one of those from Racine whom I will never see again – Homer Proffitt. Homer was one of the first people to come by the house when I moved to Racine, and I think he was the last person I saw just before driving away with a packed car on my way to Perrysburg. He was a gentle man who liked to talk, and talk, and talk. I enjoyed our conversations, and I will miss him.

With our move to Perrysburg, we began new relationships with people in that congregation and community. One individual, in particular, stood out. Terry was married to the director of children’s ministry at the church, a dedicated volunteer in youth ministry, and a talented singer on the praise team. Terry’s life came to a sudden and unexpected end following a stroke in early December. He had grown close to both of my younger children as part of the summer youth mission trips, so this death was particularly hard for them, too.

Death is a part of life. It’s inevitable. But that doesn’t make it any easier to take. In fact, I think it is the hardest thing to deal with in all of life. We can lose jobs, money, houses, cars – but those are just things. Things can be replaced; people cannot. Once a person is gone, there is no retrieving him or her.

Death tempts us to lose hope. Our pain in losing loved ones can be overwhelming. So overwhelming, that we can build emotional walls to block the pain of grief. We numb ourselves and pretend that the feelings aren’t there. Sometimes we can even fool ourselves so completely that we DON’T feel – at least consciously. But the pain is still there – waiting to tell us there is no hope.

But Jesus Christ tells us something different. He tells us that death is not the end – no matter how painful it may be. Yes, we cannot get our loved ones back; but that does not mean they are lost from us forever. There is another side of death: resurrection. Jesus Christ is called the “first born from the dead” in Colossians 1:18. His resurrection offers us encouragement and hope. If he is the first born, and we are adopted as heirs and children of God, then we, too, can experience resurrection. Death isn’t the end; it’s a new beginning.

The Apostle Paul talked about this hope: “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble, or hardship, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

So as 2008 is laid to rest, I pray that 2009 may be a time for new beginnings, new assurances that we are not separated from God by anything or anyone. And although I lost many dear friends and family in 2008, I am confident that when my time on earth is done, I will see them again. I look forward to the day, and pray that I will see you, too!