Preaching the Gospel in Word and Deed

There's a great article from Christianity Today which brings some balance to the oft-misused contention that the Gospel resonates sufficiently from our actions, and thus words become peripheral if not optional. In reality, the article is more of a closer look at the true intentions and a quick ministry study of Saint Francis of Assisi, but I'm going to focus on one aspect.

The article mentions specifically the quote attributed to Saint Francis of Assisi - "Preach the gospel at all times; when necessary, use words." The author points out not only is there a great deal of doubt from historians that these words ever came from Francis, but an objective look at his ministry reflects values contrary to that creed. Apparently, Francis was not shy is speaking truth in love and pronouncing truth.

What that quote and underlying sentiment has unfortunately become is a cop-out for many, including myself, to be timid (as opposed to bold) when it comes to the Gospel and the Gospel's impact upon my life. This came to mind recently when I was at a Session meeting discussing an upcoming church discussion about how faith should inform everything else in our lives, specifically vocation.

What I've noticed is that the pendulum has swung perhaps a little too much in the "faith and work is not just about how I find opportunities to witness to my coworkers" area, which too often means that you never witness to your coworkers. In the past ten years, there's been this momentum within the faith in the workplace movement which is all about find out how your vocation is a part of the greater redemptive work in the Kingdom of God - which generally means that you do your work with integrity and honesty and you do your work with a deliberate understanding and aspiration that it fits into the greater part of God's plan. 

What often gets lost in that lofty rhetoric is the details of what that actually means in the personal level. To say that "working with integrity with God as your boss" is what it means to be a workplace Christian can dangerously become "being a Christian is about being an honest and sincere person" - and you'll largely conform. And of course it's important to work with integrity, but to be intentional about workplace tools around communal workplace prayer, Bible study and even relational evangelism is something that should be encouraged, as well.

So as the article says, it's true that words without deeds are empty. What I also think is true is that sometimes the "quiet faith" is highly overrated. As a friend at church recently shared, if you're surrounded by non-Christians friends and they complain about people who boldly evangelize, wondering "why they can't be quiet Christians just like you", that is not a reason to be encouraged. Or put another way, our quest to not be known as Christians for the wrong reasons doesn't mean our Christian faith should not be known at all.

Fame at a Price People Aren't Willing to Pay

A recent commentary did a nice job in asking the rhetorical question of why pseudo-celebrities (such as reality television stars) sign the privacy of their lives away for money and express outrage when their lives are mysteriously under public scrutiny. The article references the buzz around alleged affairs by the two adult stars of Jon & Kate Plus 8 as an example of the reality-show variety, but also mentions Brooke Shields as an example of "professional" celebrity which inexplicably appeals for a firewall to be placed upon her private life.

The author points out hypocrisy on the part of these (pseudo) celebrities, with Kate Gosselin of “Jon & Kate” appealing for privacy at a publicity appearance in Michigan, and Brooke Shields complaining about access to her life when she bared her soul and her mental health issues on an episode of Oprah. I think there's some merit here. Celebrity life comes with some privileges along with some baggage. As a celebrity, you're paid remarkably well and you're given a platform to espouse your views (e.g. anti-war, gay rights, defense of marriage, animal rights, pro-life) when chances are you have no more credibility or knowledge of these topics than the neighbors who live with me. You're given the sympathy and support of millions of fans when hardship hits your life while others make do with a small circle of family of friends. While I think people should take, let's say, Sean Penn's foreign policy musings, with a grain of salt given his lack of credentials, I don't begrudge him his right to use his platform. As a celebrity who has earned his celebrity though his craft, he has that right.

But that right comes with the baggage that comes along with it. There are two sides to that "fame" coin. This applies all the more to the reality television pseudo-celebrities who have stumbled into fame largely as a result of a television network brainstorming sessions on how we can make everyday people entertaining. It's safe to say that these folks never had any grand ambitions to become celebrities. Most of these people had "normal" lives before celebrity and they made a conscious choice to trade that in for a lucrative television contract. If you really dislike it, just walk away. The American public has a very short memory and you will be forgotten and subsequently left alone. 

As for me, I could never quite see the appeal of reality television. How real is a life lived in front of cameras and a crew? Plus, I have plenty of everyday drama and comedy in my own life that I'm emotionally vested in - I don't need to tune in to see child tantrums, random conversations and humorous visits to the supermarket. Most of those experiences aren't Emmy-worthy and they don't come with a soundtrack, but they're just right for me.

But Would it Keep LeBron in Cleveland?

There's been quite a buzz in the news that a group of Chinese investors are in serious talks to acquire a large ownership share of the Cleveland Cavaliers. Conventional logic says that the move is being made by Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert for two reasons, one of which is really embedded within the other. First, the leader of the Chinese group, Kenny Huang, is a guru when it comes to brokering sponsorship deals connecting American sports franchises with Chinese companies with the blessing of the Chinese government. He's remarkably connected (e.g. he's probably more corrupt than most Chicago politicians). In any case, the massive consumer base with increasing potential is a tremendous untapped market.

The second reason is that Gilbert needs to desperately keep LeBron James with the team after his current contract expires after 2010. LeBron, besides being arguably the best player in the league, is a businessman who knows that it's important to raise his global profile. If Gilbert feels that Kenny Huang and his Chinese counterparts can provide that to LeBron, it only increases his ability to convince LeBron to stay.

It might work. In this increasingly connected world where streaming video over the Internet is becoming the common means of viewing sports and anyone who has a computer can view almost anything, it's not certain that LeBron is going to get any more exposure being, let's say, a New York Knick, any more than he would be than being in Cleveland. His games will be broadcast regardless of who he plays for, because he's that good. I don't think his global appeal is going to be affected by where he chooses to play in the NBA.

But if he ever wants to be celebrated within New York City, that's something that he'd have to come here to do. I get the sense if you asked people like Derek Jeter, Joe Namath, and Mark Messier - they'd say that there's something special about winning on the largest stage and being celebrated by a city that fancies itself as the capital of the world.

The Agony of Defeat in Sports Management

Interesting article last week in the New York Times about the recession hitting those who dream of a career in sports management. An area which traditionally has taken advantage of people willing to work for peanuts in exchange for the privilege of working near the glow of famous athletes is tightening the belt even tighter, as the supply of experienced GM-wannabes dwarfs dwindling open positions as money spent on sports shrinks.

As I had written in a previous post, I had once dreamed about a career in sports management myself, until reality set in. The truth is that there are so precious few slots available to be the next Pat Gillick, Theo Epstein, Rod Thorn or Lou Lamoriello. If you want to be a GM, you need to have a combination of expertise in scouting, contract law, and finance to navigate through the collective bargaining and salary cap labyrinths. Winning your fantasy football league (as I have done) doesn't mean that you qualify for that position. And the vast majority of positions are far less glorious, and usually involve grunt work and menial analyst-like paper-pushing. Think of it as an entry level job at a bank, except at 75% less pay - I only know this because many years ago, a friend of mine bought me a gag gift of a one-month subscription at at sports job recruiting website.

But I do admire those who hold steadfast to their dreams of a job in sports. If you're willing to accept the downside risk, why not go for it?

The Neverending Problem of North Korea

So North Korea is doing some more saber-rattling again. I remember when there was even more hand-wringing in fear of a full blown war with North Korea in 1994 when the rogue country was poised to eject international monitors from the country and begin reprocessing plutonium for belligerent purposes. But Jimmy Carter wonderfully (a little sarcasm here) came to the rescue and brokered an agreement for the Clinton administration where the United States would pony up economic aid in exchange for the suspension of North Korean nuclear weapons program. Yup, that really worked well. Forgive my frustration with idiotic diplomacy, but at least I'm a little less harsh and cynical than a past editorial which was as timely in 2006 as it is today.

In fairness, there's plenty of bipartisan blame to go around, as referenced in an analysis from the Washington Post. There's evidence that unilateral pressure and engagement without the cooperation of all the other UN Security Council members (especially China) has failed. There's also evidence that six-party talks leading to unkept assurances are similarly fruitless - a sentiment voiced recently by Secretary of State Clinton. 

So pundits will continue to state the obvious, as a recent Newsweek article did: that there needs to be appropriate balance "carrots" and "sticks". Nobody reasonable would advocate a military action without sufficiently allowing room for diplomacy to work. But I think it's about time to realize that UN Security Council condemnations without any corresponding meaningful actions and statements of "outrage" have historically been grossly ineffective - just like past "negotiated treaties" which are taken as seriously as Paulie Shore. So people at the State Department and the Obama administration will try to try to rationally deal with those who are irrational.

Not at all to minimize the seriousness of a potential sale of weaponized atomic material to other rogue nations or groups or a direct attack from North Korea on any of the United States' allies, but two things come to mind:

• The old article from The Onion: "North Korean Nukes Self In Desperate Plea For Attention"

• This dialogue from the movie "Team America: World Police", which seems to lampoon well the idea that stern condemnations will bring the North Korean nuclear program to a screeching halt:
  

Kim Jong Il: Hans Brix? Oh no! Oh, herro. Great to see you again, Hans! 

Hans Blix: Mr. Il, I was supposed to be allowed to inspect your palace today, but your guards won't let me enter certain areas. 

Kim Jong Il: Hans, Hans, Hans! We've been frew this a dozen times. I don't have any weapons of mass destwuction, OK Hans? 

Hans Blix: Then let me look around, so I can ease the UN's collective mind. I'm sorry, but the UN must be firm with you. Let me in, or else. 

Kim Jong Il: Or else what? 

Hans Blix: Or else we will be very angry with you... and we will write you a letter, telling you how angry we are!

Sometimes, you just have to laugh at things. I suspect the North Koreans are.

A Little Too Much Vicarious Living

In another sad story highlighting people who take sports a little bit too seriously, a Nigerian man killed four people when he ran over a group of Barcelona fans who were celebrating Barca's win over Manchester United.

Many of these soccer fans are absolutely nuts. I mean, you can say what you want about Oakland Raider fans and people who sit on the upper level at Philadelphia Eagles games, but there's nothing that stirs up fan passion the way that soccer does. In fact, it's true that soccer was key part of the backdrop of a war, though not the underlying cause as some misunderstand. But still, nothing makes me think about the modern day analog for the frenzy of the Roman Coliseum than a soccer match.

I'm a sports fan, and I confess that I've celebrated great victories and have lamented over tough defeats. Someone pointed out to me that one of the ways that sports fans illustrate unhealthy fandom is the use of the plural first person, such as "Man, we were doing so well until the fourth quarter" or "We need to play better defense." We? Unless you're somehow an owner, employee or player on the team, how exactly are we staking a claim to be part of the team?

Of course I know why fans (and I) do it. We live vicariously through our sports teams because the thrill of victory feels good. Which is usually just fine until you decide to commit vehicular homicide when your team loses.

Semi-Spontaneity at the Jersey Shore

As of last Friday morning, Sarah and I still had no plans for Memorial Day weekend. The traditional barbeque at our house never materialized, and between Sarah's busyness with the kids and my busyness at work, plans such as Dutch Wonderland and Sesame Place were kicked around but for a variety of reasons never firmed up. So we were pretty much ready to make it a garden variety weekend with the blessing of an extra day.

At work at around 11am, Sarah called me and suggested that we do a quick ride to down to Wildwood Crest and stay over Friday night. Sure, why not? Having been there twice in the past four years, we knew the route and we knew where to go for good food, and the kids always are suckers for the beach, so it seemed like a winner. So after I got back from work early, we huddled into the car and made our way down the Garden State Parkway, and after enduring some pretty gnarly traffic, we finally arrive at our little beachside motel.

It was a great time, and I'm glad we did it. The kids got a good hour and a half of beach time before the sunset. We went to an old favorite, the Ravioli House, and stuffed ourselves before grabbing a cannoli for dessert. The kids were fading, and we put them in the separate bedroom in our suite (after our insomnia session on a trip last December, we've become big believers in finding and booking accommodations which include a separate room where we can put the kids) before calling it a night. The next morning included a good three hours of beautiful beach time, lunch at the Lobster House, and a surrey bike ride and shopping in Cape May.

For a hyper-organized (i.e. anal) guy like myself, it was a nice departure from the usual "plan weeks in advance while trying to scour the web for any discount" routine. Angst from screaming kids in the backseat while driving notwithstanding, I think I enjoyed myself enough to do it again someday.