Reflections on some differences between Olmsted Falls, OH and the SF Bay Area

I've been thinking the last couple of days about the many things that are different about living here in Olmsted Falls, OH as opposed to the San Francisco Bay Area. I am certain that the longer I am here, the more I will notice. But I am also certain that after a time some of the things I'm now noticing will seem so normal that I will forget them unless I make a note of it now, so, without judgment or comment, here are differences I am now noticing between our community in CA and our community here in Olmsted Falls, OH:

1. Obviously this is a much, much more homogeneous area than the Bay Area. I've moved from a church with people from different countries (Indonesia, Cameroon, Holland) and different ethnic backgrounds (too many to name) to a church that has only a couple people of color in it. My kids' schools were over 50% people of color in CA, here they are almost completely white.

2. There is not as much recycling or conservation going on here. No curb-side paper recycling. No curb-side composting, (no green bin at all, actually, for yard trimmings either, etc.). Recycling is expected to be minimal, so people are allowed to put out a blue plastic bag with recyclable items in it, as opposed to CA where you have a very small garbage can in contrast to the very large recycling bins put out every week.

3. They still have people who come out here to your house once a month to check on your gas/electric meters manually - this is not done electronically or digitally yet.

4. I have yet to see a house here with solar panels on it, including the new houses. Actually, the only solar panels I have seen at all here were at the science center (big surprise!).

5. Car smog regulations are minimal here, as opposed to CA.

6. The "high speed internet" here is both unreliable and slow. Speed and reliability are obviously much greater near the Silicon Valley.

7. There are not only speed limit signs posted, but also "minimum speed limit" signs posted on every freeway here.

8. There are street signs here that tell you what street is coming up ahead. Signs such as "Nobottom street, 500 feet" (not kidding about the name of the street, by the way!). This is very helpful to people from out of town!!

9. Most houses do not have fences around the yards. There is nothing to separate lots but trees, creating a much more open feel.

10. There are no mail trucks in our town!! The postal carriers do not wear uniforms and they drive their own vehicles to deliver the mail!!

11. Car salesmen do not seem to behave the same way here: we went to check out a used car that was for sale at the dealership. When we arrived, the car was already sold. The dealer said to us, "Oh, sorry about that," and then he walked off! He didn't try to sell us something else. He didn't even ask us if we were interested in looking at something else. Mark and I were stunned!!

12. They bus kids to school here. It's just like when we were kids: kids of all ages (including my kindergartener) walk to the bus-stop, where they are picked up by a bus to go to school. After school, they are dropped off at a bus-stop and they walk themselves home. Amazing.

13. "Snacks" that schools provide to children are usually candy, punch and other sweet things. There seems to be a definite lack of health consciousness in terms of foods at the schools and at other programs for kids. I have yet to take my child to a program here (including library time and mommy-and-me class given through the public education system here) that did not try to give my kid(s) some kind of candy or other sweet treat.

14. Parents also seem to leave their children at home alone a lot younger than in CA where it is actually against the law to leave a kid under the age of 12 home alone. Not that there weren't many parents in CA who ignored this law or who were unaware of it (some close to me), but it seems a far greater number do this here. The "latch key kid" phenomenon is pretty prevelant here, whereas in CA, there are more and more afterschool programs that kids stay in until their parents get off work.

15. Pre-schools here are not flexible about the hours the children go to school. Three year olds in pre-school here have one option: two mornings a week for two hours. The days the kids go is school-specific (again, not flexible, but specific at each school), but every pre-school has three year olds going two mornings a week for two hours. When they become four, they go three days a week for two hours. If you need more care than that, your child must go to day-care instead of pre-school. In CA, you can pick the times, and days (both the number of days and what days you want them to go), as well as the number of hours your pre-schooler goes to school, though they would never go to a school for less than three hours at a time.

16. Car seat law in CA is that children must be six years old or sixty pounds. Legislators are trying to change this to eight and eighty pounds. In OH, the law is four and forty pounds.

17. Grocery stores here are starting to carry some organic products. They are a lot more expensive, as they are in CA when you go to a "regular" grocery store and try to buy organic. In CA you can get around this by going to stores that specialize in organic foods such as Whole Foods. At least on the West side of Cleveland there is no store like that.

18. Generally speaking, people are much more polite in OH. Also much less direct. I've been accused of being "bull-headed" here. While I understand that that usually means stubborn, I haven't been stubborn about anything here, and I'm coming to believe this has a lot more to do with being direct. Being direct is not always considered polite.

19. Of course the whole snow phenomenon is different here: every home owner has a hired snowplow company who does their streets and drive ways. It is an added but necessary winter expense.

20. There is an NPR station here that broadcasts classical music without commercials!! The only classical station in SF was a for-profit station.

21. A lot more people smoke here. I know several people here whom I love dearly who smoke. I didn't know a single person who smoked in CA.

22. Schools are paid for in some weird way that has actually been twice declared illegal by the supreme court, but no-one here enforces that decision. So, this has to do with levys that are voted on by each town/community. As a result, the quality of education varies HUGELY from city to city here (not that it doesn't in CA, but CA is more consistently bad in its public education because of lack of funding than here where these levies can boost some school districts up a great deal).

23. There is a free National Art Museum here and the NASA center is free. Very nice.

24. PBS, or "public broadcasting system" requires cable to be accessed here....you have to PAY to receive the public broadcasting system here!!!! (yes, I have written to them in great irritation).

25. While in both the Bay Area and the Cleveland area, suburbs are all smushed together so that you can't tell where one city begins and the other ends, we live now in a city with population of 7,000 people as opposed to the 60,000 of San Leandro. At the same time, our kids go to a school that is only k-3 grades, and yet there are 1200 kids at the school. (The school covers two "cities" here). There is only one elementary school here for these two cities. Then there is a school they call "intermediate" which is for 4-5 grades, etc. In other words, all the kids of the same age go to one school. Schools are not divided so much by location as by age.

26. People in the Bay Area care about sports. People in Cleveland would literally die for their teams!!!! If you can't talk sports, you can't speak the language (yes, Mark and I are in trouble now!). Article in the local paper that talked about Obama today, spoke about what he was doing in football terms. This is how they talk here.

27. Check-out clerks in the stores in CA might say "hi, how are you?" but they don't mean it and just as often, they say nothing at all. Here in OH, check-out clerks want to be your best friend. They are all friendly and seem genuinely interested. They talk about the things you are buying, they make suggestions about how to buy better, or differently, they ask how you like different products and about your children and your family, etc. This is consistent at every store we have visited.

28. I've already mentioned some other things: the fact that people are not suing everybody over every opportunity, for example

I'll stop for now. When I think of more, I'll add it in.

good night.

A rant about over populating the earth.

When my eldest daughter was born I was part of a group of women who were raising their children using attachment-parenting. We shared a lot in common in our beliefs that children who are securely attached to their parents have an easier time achieving independence, in our belief in the strong and good gifts that long-term nursing can give, in our beliefs that the "cry it out" method can be very harmful to children and does not move them into bed-time independence any earlier or any more successfully, but in fact creates insecure attachments which will later make both independence and commitment to other relationships very difficult. However, there was one point about which we disagreed. One of the women in the group was absolutely committed to having as many children as she could, and she told us that this was because of her faith in God. She said that she was going to leave the number of children she had up to God and that she believed birth-control of any kind to be a sin.

I've been thinking about this and I have to say that I find this whole line of argument very problematic. First of all, her own behavior showed that she was not leaving life and death issues up to God. For one thing, she weaned her first child at a very early age because she knew that nursing can delay the conception of another child. This is not leaving the choice up to "God" (from now on I will be putting this image of God in quotes because I don't think this is how God actually works or who God actually is. But if you believe birth control is somehow interfering with God's will, you have to take this all the way). She was pushing for an earlier second child. This is interfering. Second, when her second child was born, he had severe health issues, issues which would have meant the child would not survive without serious medical intervention. Again, if we are strict about leaving life and death issues up to "God", she would not have used the serious medical intervention, but allowed "God" to decide whether or not the child lived. Who made the arbitrary decision that a doctor can be the hand of God at work among us, but birth-control is somehow the hand of Satan? Birth control can also be about life, as we can give better care to more when we keep the population, both in our own families and in our world, to a manageable number.

Finally, I find that standing on the scripture that says "be fruitful, multiply and fill the earth" in order to justify a choice to have many, many babies to also be very problematic. Assuming that this woman was correct in her interpretation of this scripture that God wanted us to actually fill the earth, this has already been done. If I ask for a full glass of water, I expect you to stop when the glass is full. I don't expect you to stand by my side continuing to pour water into the overflowing glass, and continue and continue and continue, pouring water all over the table, onto the floor, etc. We've reached that point, people. We are beyond that point. We are at the point at which earth cannot sustain all the people we've added to this planet. Supporting over-population is not a "pro-life" stand. Because, while you may be able to support your ten children, you do so at the cost of others who cannot live because there is not enough food or water for all of us. It's like adding the water into the bottom of the over-full glass. It will still push some more out onto the floor. I realize this is a bit over-simplified and that the whole starvation and water situations are much more political than this is addressing.

But my point is that if you want to have more and more children, do it honestly. Don't blame God or say that it is God's will, or be self-righteous about a personal choice that ends up contributing to overpopulation, something God never wanted (find me the scripture that says God wants there to be so many people on the earth that we could threaten all earthly life, if you disagree). Mark and I are contributing to the problem: we had three kids instead of an even two. So I own, I confess, that it was my own desire for children that led to this decision. This was not done in a moment of concern for the earth, or out of a sense of justice, and it was certainly not a "faithful" choice. We cannot pass on the blame and say that it was "God's" choice or decision for us.

The only personal claim I can make in this is that we chose honestly, knowing we were once again making a choice despite our values, not because of them. That's all I ask of others, too. Don't blame God for your choices. Own them. Name them as your own. And pray for God's grace, wisdom, courage and mercy as you sally forth.

Sunday's Sermon: Coming into our true natures

I’d like to invite you to take a moment to think of a situation in which you weren’t seen for who you really are: a situation in which someone completely misunderstood you, didn’t understand what you were saying or see you as you really are and made assumptions about your motivation, or your person-hood that were just plain wrong. I think for most of us these situations have been painful or unpleasant, though it can also happen that someone thinks of you as better than you are, misunderstanding you in a way that puts you higher in someone’s esteem than you might deserve. Can you think of a situation like that?
Jasmyn and I are reading the book Dancing Shoes by Noel Streatfeild. And in the book, the little girl, Rachel, whose mother has just died, is seen as a sulky, cold, jealous little girl because she is adamant that her adopted sister, Hillary, not be part of the Wintle’s Little Wonders dance troupe. The reader in the story is let in on the fact that Rachel does not wish this for Hillary because she loves Hillary deeply, feels responsibly for Hillary’s well being after the death of their mother, and believes that Hillary is capable of being a real ballet dancer with a professional ballet company. But the adult characters in the book universally misunderstand Rachel and believe that she is an awful, unfeeling, jealous child. This creates the tension in the story which is only resolved at the end when she is finally seen and heard for who she is and finally treated as the loving child she is. I find it hard to read through because of the pain of this misunderstanding, and the pain of the child at being mistreated because she is misunderstood.
But this theme, of mis-seeing someone, misunderstanding some-one’s true character is a very, very common theme in our literature, in our television, in our movies. In Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth’s misunderstanding of Darcy (and visa versa), Jane’s misunderstanding of Bingley’s sisters, and everyone’s misunderstanding of Wickersham make up the drama of the story line: all of which, again, are only resolved at the end. In the movie Run Away Bride, the Julia Robert’s character is misunderstood by everyone, herself included. Mark and I just watched a Monk the detective story last night on DVD in which a person was believed to be a hero who really wasn’t. It is everywhere. So many of our stories are made up of this simple misunderstanding of someone’s motives, person-hood or identity.
We witness this in our own lives, we act out this misunderstanding at a smaller level on a daily basis. The man who made a small mistake driving in the car next to us becomes an “idiot”. The sales person on the phone who can’t give us the lower price we want becomes “greedy”. The man with his shirt half untucked becomes a “slob”. The pregnant teenage child becomes a “slut”. We all do these snap judgments that do not really see people for who they are.
Why do you think this theme is so common? I think it is common for two reasons. First, we try to understand people by putting people into categories, setting up images of each person in our minds about who they are and what they are like in an effort to understand our world and to relate to it in a way that makes sense. We all do this. Scientifically speaking, we can’t make sense of the many images and information that comes at us all the time unless we somehow categorize and sort through the information, and we do this with the characters of the people we meet as well. “That person is a care-taker” or “that person is a cynic” or “that person is a little off their rocker”. These are ways in which we make sense of people and know how to treat them, how to interact with them.
Second, people are very complex. So it is easy to get our judgments about people’s motivations for certain behaviors wrong because people rarely do anything for only one reason.
 So you put together that we are quick to make judgments about why people do what they do alongside the fact that there are usually multiple reasons why a person does what they do, and we end up, in many instances with a false understanding of the people around us.
We’ve all been a victim of this at one time or another. And chances are, we’ve all been mistaken in our understanding of others at one time or another.
This is about identity. And so now I’d like to ask you to think about your own identity again for a moment. Who are you at your basic core? Who is it that God has called you to be? When are you most fully yourself?
Can you think of a moment or a time when you were most fully yourself: when you were the most whole, most God-following person, most you at your deepest core? What did that feel like? As you journey through your life do those moments come more or less often for you? Are there certain situations that call that out of you?
One of my favorite movies is the Edward Norton film, “Keeping the faith”. Without revealing too much of the film for those of you who have not seen it yet, part of the movie involves a priest named Brian, a priest who is very good at his work, a priest for whom his calling is real and central to who he is..... a priest who falls in love with a woman. And while she does not return his affection, his own feelings cause him to question his vocation as a priest. At one point in the movie he is talking to the woman about the situation, and he says, “I don’t know which feels worse: having my heart broken, or starting to doubt myself because of what that means for me.”
She responds, “Don’t you dare doubt yourself because of me. You have a gift and you know it. If you start to doubt that because of me, I don’t know what I’d do with myself.”
Brian answered this by saying, “I don’t doubt myself because of you. I feel like the best version of myself around you and that makes me doubt everything else.”
Brian takes his confusion to his mentor priest. Brian says to him, “Let me tell you something. If she had loved me back, I don’t think I’d be sitting here right now. I mean she didn’t. But I remember what you said at the seminary...that the life of a priest is hard, and if you can see yourself doing anything else, then you should do that.”
His mentor responds: “the truth is you can never tell yourself there is only one thing you can be, whether it be marriage or the priesthood or anything else. You cannot make a real commitment to anything unless you accept that it is a choice that you make again and again and again.” Those choices, those decisions, those commitments are basic to our identity.
 Identity. Who are we at our core? Who does God call each of us as individuals to be? If our jobs are a real vocation for us then that is a prime part of our identity: for many of us we are defined by our roles as workers of whatever kind, also as parents, as a spouse, as a Christian - whatever it is that tugs at your heart and calls from you all of your being. What happens then when something changes? What happens when a child dies, a divorce happens, or you find you need to change career? These things can be devastating not only because they are stressful, but because they challenge our very identity.
Both of today’s scriptural passages talk about identity.
In the passage from 2 Kings, Elisha is coming into his own. He is losing his identity as the follower, the servant, the apprentice of Elijah, because Elijah is being taken up, he is leaving. This is devastating to Elisha. Everyone around him keeps reminding him that Elijah will soon be gone. And his response is to say, “Yes, I know. Shut up!!” He doesn’t want to hear it. And he doesn’t want to say goodbye to Elijah, not just because he loves Elijah but because Elisha’s identity is as Elijah’s apprentice. Elijah keeps trying to send him away and Elisha refuses, “As the Lord lives and as you yourself live, I will not leave you.” But eventually Elijah must go. And so Elisha is faced with finding a new identity.
 Fortunately, he is able to make that transition. And while it still remains tied to Elijah, and informed by his time with Elijah, it also must be his own. Elisha’s new identity comes in the form of asking from Elijah a gift that will inform all of Elisha’s ministry. He asks for double Elijah’s spirit, or energy, or power to connect with the divine. He also tears his own clothes and takes up Elijah’s mantle after Elijah is gone. Elisha finds his identity still deeply linked to his past, but he claims it in a new way, in a new mode. He becomes twice the prophet that Elijah was. His strength of spirit is so great that he is able to separate the waters and walk through them, like Moses. And his ministry, while informed, energized and set in motion by the past, is his own. He becomes what he was meant to be. He comes into his own true nature: and he does so in a way that everyone can now see it as well. The result is that he is great. He is amazing. He is known throughout history.
In the story from Mark we see Jesus’ transfiguration. And in this story, the recognition of true identity is challenging not for Jesus, but for those around him. For just a moment, he is seen in his greatness by his closest friends. They are given the gift of seeing who and how Jesus truly is. And their reaction is to be afraid. Because when a person is seen as they really are, they can’t be completely boxed, which means they can’t be completely understood. The disciples don’t understand what they are seeing, and that is scary, for any of us.
 Real identity is scary. The core of who we are, I would say, not just for Jesus, but for us as well, is something difficult to present, something difficult to claim, difficult to comprehend, something we are constantly working towards, journeying into. God calls us to make that journey. God wants us to be the people God intends us to be.
But for today, as we think about Jesus and as we think about who we are called to be, my challenge for you is not just to intentionally walk that journey, but also to remember that when you talk to someone, when you drive next to someone, when you interact with anyone, remember that you are not seeing all of who they are, you are not getting the full picture, and that helping someone else to walk towards wholeness involves looking for the whole picture, while knowing you won’t see it all, looking for the best in them.
As I thought about the passages today, I remembered this proverb:
Wind and Sun wanted to see who could be first to remove a man’s coat. Wind blew hard, trying to force the coat off. The cold man only pulled it tighter. Sun smiled brightly to warm the air. The hot man took off his coat. “You see,” said the sun, “there is great strength in gentleness.”
I think coming into our true natures is something like recognizing that our real natures can move mountains. Our real beings, through love and gentleness can make a difference. We don’t have to fight to change the world when we are whole. Just being will get any job done. Amen.

The down side of snow/cold/ice.

Today we had several people slip and fall on the snow/ice in the church parking lot. One was a little boy of 5, who cried and cried. One was an adult man who cursed and cursed. And one of those people severely fractured his hip in that fall today, and now needs surgery, a surgery complicated by a heart condition. It didn't look like the snow was bad: it wasn't deep enough for our snow plow people to come and plow the parking lot because it was very thin. But when I stepped out of the car, and I saw one of the youth literally skate across the parking lot (in his tennis shoes), I knew that under the snow was a layer of that black ice that we are constantly warned about. Still, I am new to this area. I didn't know what should be done, except to sprinkle salt on it, or something with traction, something someone did, but which wasn't enough to prevent today's accident.

Last year someone fell and broke their pelvis on this same ice.

The year before that, it was someone's hip again.

All in the church parking lot.

In the face of this, it amazes me that our pews are pretty full each week of the winter and it is supposedly the summer in which our attendance is slim.

Maybe people deal with hardship differently in icy places than back in CA. For one thing, I know way too many people who would see these accidents as opportunities to cash in through insurance law suits, but so far the church has not been sued (pray that this is not the time that changes!). Plus, everyone here who has been in one of these accidents has told me about it, so far it hasn't caused anyone to leave the church or to stop coming, even in the winter.

But whether or not we are sued, whether or not people stop coming to church, these accidents are terrible. It is awful that this person is going to be in the hospital for awhile now, unable to work, unable to be with his family. It is awful that he needs surgery and that because he has a heart condition, this isn't just a simple little surgery but a big deal, dangerous event. Part of me feels personally responsible for this, as one of the pastors of this church.

But regardless, today I don't like the icy snow. Today I am angry at this scary, icy snow business. Today I am worried about our parishioner, and concerned about who else will be hurt by this stuff. Today I am searching for tools to fight these elements in an effective way and a team of people to help me do it. Today I am awed by the power of the elements to defeat us, to overcome us, to hurt us - we who sometimes think we are mini-gods able to do anything we want. Today I am reminded of how small and powerless we really are, for better or for worse. This snow is not something small or insubstantial. It is something to be reckoned with. And that is a hard fact to face, today.

So I find myself turning first to the strongest, most constant tool at my disposal - the power of prayer. And I find myself returning to the serenity prayer, for it once again fits this situation like nothing else:
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

More on not seeing things as they really are. More on assumptions.

Yesterday we had a meal at church for our seniors. One of the foods they had was Spaetzle, which is a German pasta. I was not familiar with this food and asked someone what it was and where it was from. Her response was, "Oh, yeah. Since you're from California you are probably not used to all this ethnic food."

She was serious.

Do I need to say more?

Who are we?

I've been thinking today a lot about who people "really" are. I know for me, I am not just one way of being. I never have been. For example, at every single church or camp or school or leadership situation I've been in, every single one, starting from when I was really quite young, at some point the people there say to me, "wow, you've really matured during your time here." And then they proceed to tell me the ways in which I've actually gone from being a stressed out, shy new person (trying to be an extroverted, interesting person) to being a person who is comfortable in the space, more relaxed. This has happened to me, as I've said, in really every new situation I've been in. And it's not really that I've "matured" or "grown" or "come into my own" (the most common phrases used to describe this). It is, as I've just said, that I am not comfortable in new situations. And when I do become comfortable my behavior changes, significantly, as it turns out.

Still, I haven't known or understood exactly how my behavior changes. I hear people say it, again and again. But haven't been able to see what that means. But now I'm in a new situation again. And this is the first time that Mark has seen me in a completely new situation. When we met, I had already been at seminary two years, so he didn't see me in a new situation there. When I took my first "call" I was in AZ by myself, so he didn't see me there. When I came back to CA and began different church positions there, he was working at a different church, so he never saw me. But now we are starting a job together, in a new place, and he is seeing this side of me that obviously makes others uneasy since it is always described positively when I'm not acting like this anymore. So, for the first time, I am getting feedback of a different kind, feedback from someone who knows me when I'm comfortable and is now, for the first time, seeing me when I'm not.

Mark is almost always positive when it comes to me. So he describes my behavior as "extremely high energy. Not like I've ever seen you before." But I think what he's trying to say is that I'm running around like a whirling dervish or the energizer bunny, or a chicken with its head cut off. This was confirmed on Sunday when, for the first time since I've been here, I actually made it to coffee hour after worship (rather than ending up trapped in the sanctuary or my office doing church business), and sat down at a table with some folk. I started to eat the little foods on my plate, and then looked up and noticed everyone at the table staring at me. "What?" I asked.

"Are you okay?" one of the women said. "Are you having a down day?"

I was confused and said, "No. I just wanted to make it to coffee hour today to sit with people and talk."

"Oh." she said, "I don't think we've ever seen you sit down." huh.

I can give all sorts of excuses: when we came here we were sort of thrown head-first into the church business. We did officer training and installation within a week of being here, then we had this special worship service called...I can't remember, but something about the tartans, and we have to plan our installation and we are leading an all church retreat in two weeks, plus putting together extra lenten services, talking about nesting with another congregation, and just trying to get to know people and do the regular business of the church. We want to start a kids program, for the sake of our own kids as well as the church...All of this is true. But the bigger reality for me is that I am not comfortable here yet because I don't know people, I don't know the players, I don't understand the set-up or the situation, I don't know where the sacred cows are. And so I'm frantically trying to get to know all of this and I come across as exactly that - frantic.

So...I am trying to take a breath. I am trying to step down a little. This reality check has been good for me.

But additionally, it calls me, again, to look at my assumptions about other people. When we assume we know people, after a short acquaintance, we are not giving people the benefit of recognizing their complexity, their multiple layers of being, their stories that define who they are and how they will be in new situations, in different situations, over time as we get to know them. This reality also calls me to slow down. I can't get to know the church overnight. I can't get to know these individual people over night. And being frantic will not lessen the time it will take to be on this journey in this place, with these people, at this time. Instead it will cause people to feel frantic and uneasy around me and will, therefore, lengthen the amount of time it will take. So here's my new mantra:

Slow down, take the time, breathe. Slow down, take the time, breathe. Slow down, take the time, breathe.

Ask me how it's going next month!

Entering Lent in a new way

I went to get my Ohio driver’s license this last week. It was a task, as I know it always is. First, the BMV needed to see my social security card (in California this is the Department of Motor Vehicles -DMV. Here it is the Bureau of Motor Vehicles - BMV). Do you know where your social security card is? This is the first time I think I’ve ever been asked to show mine. I have the number memorized, but that wasn’t enough: they needed to actually see the card. Needless to say, I couldn’t find it. So my next stop was to go down to another town to the social security office. I took a number, which said that my wait would be about 15 minutes. An hour and fifteen minutes later, I was finally called and proceeded through the process of ordering a new social security card. Then I went back to the BMV. I stood in line for another 20 minutes only to be told I was in the wrong place and needed to go to another line to take the driving test. I started to take the test, got 17 questions into it, and the computer went down. Did I mention that all this time I had Aislynn with me, who was not dealing well with long waits (what 3 year old would?)? Did I also mention that I needed to come home and meet the older kids’ bus after school? So I looked at the clock and realized time was going to be a problem. I called out for help. The attendant said, “Oh, yeah. I’ll have that up and running in a minute.” I waited five minutes, after which the computer screen changed but was still not set up in a way that I could continue the test. So after staring at it for another couple minutes, I asked if there was something more I needed to do to get it going. She told me to wait again and finally, another five minutes later, she moved me onto another computer. I worked on the test for another couple minutes and, guess what? This computer also shut down! I said, “Oh no!” And the attendant behind me said, “You will survive this!!” in the most nasty tone of voice I could imagine.

I was stunned. Who was this person who felt the need to be rude to me while I was stressed about meeting the needs of my children? What was she thinking her rudeness would accomplish? Did she think that telling me I would survive this in a nasty voice would somehow lessen my stress? Or shame me into “better behavior”?

But as I’ve thought about it, I think this situation offered a good lessen for lent. Lent is a time of preparation and of repentance. We take the time during lent to prepare for the passion of Christ and we do so by looking at the things in our own lives that need our attention, that need to be changed or redirected, that need the healing of Christ. It is a time of spiritual discipline that calls us to be more focused in our own internal work with God to be the most God calls us to be. That doesn’t mean looking at the behaviors of others, it means looking at our own behavior. In my case, I need to remember that just as the attendant had no idea what I was going through that day, I also had no idea what she was experiencing that day. From that place of compassion, my lenten challenge is to find patience and forgiveness, despite the fact that her pain, whatever it was, was aimed at me that day.

May you also find the challenges in your life to be opportunities for growth. May you be empowered during this lenten season to seek out those challenges, not as irritations, but as God-moments, given to you to stretch you and help you learn. May you see God’s face in every situation, whether it be a situation that feeds you or one that calls from you the best of who you are. May you walk towards Easter in a new way, looking for the resurrection and new life present in every day.

A rant about misinformed presenters

This evening I went to a mother's group for the first time. It came highly recommended as a way to connect with people outside of the church and I was very excited about going. I think there is potential here for making friends and making connections.

That being said, once again, I was amazed by the presentation. They had invited a person to speak on holistic health. Okay, so far so good. But this woman clearly did not know what she was talking about and I was embarrassed for her and shocked that no-one else in the room seemed to notice or care that most of the information she gave was just plain erroneous.

Some examples:
1. She began her talk by demonstrating how much sugar a person eats in a day. She did this by quoting how much sugar was in a series of foods that one might eat in a normal day and then scooping that amount into a clear bowl for us to see. Except that she gave the amount of sugar in each food in terms of teaspoons and then proceeded to scoop rounded tablespoons into the bowl. There is a huge difference between a teaspoon and a rounded tablespoon, people!! We are talking about maybe 4 times as much.

2. She then proceeded to tell us that all of what our body needs in terms of foods is complex carbohydrates and then gave examples such as apples (which are mostly simple carbs, not complex carbs).

3. She told us that it is very important to sit down to eat, rather than standing at the refrigerator to eat. The proof of this was that some rabbits were genetically engineered to get an illness and some of the rabbits didn't. They discovered that the rabbits who didn't get sick were being petted by their care-taker. Her conclusion was that because these were the same people who fed them, it was obvious that sitting down to eat was important! She somehow totally missed the obvious conclusion that touch and nurture and care make a difference in health.

4. She asked if we ate breakfast and then said that people who don't eat breakfast become hyper-glycemic. First of all "HYPER" means "too much". So, how do they become over-sugared by not eating? Second, hypoglycemia is not something you "get" by not eating breakfast. It is the opposite of diabetes and is a very serious problem involving insulin levels, etc. .

I could go on, but I'll spare you.

It just seems to me that if you are going to speak as an expert and present demonstrations that you should have some kind of accurate information about what you are talking about. At the same time, I have to acknowledge that science, all science, is a developing art (or science, to be redundant). We are constantly learning new things that prove our past insights to be erroneous or incomplete, and that learning, that growth, is good. So who knows? Maybe they will discover that a person becomes "hyper-glycemic" (whatever that is) from not eating breakfast and maybe they will learn that the genetically engineered rabbits who stayed well didn't get sick because they were sitting down to eat (?!).

Until then, I choose to be grateful that she was so entertaining in her statements, and that she gave me something to write about in my blog. May you also find entertainment in unexpected places as well as "interesting" things to communicate about.
in peace,

More on the weird role of pastor.

I've been thinking a lot these last couple of weeks about the weird role of being a pastor. We are trained and taught that we need to keep a personal distance from our parishioners. We need to keep that distance for a number of reasons: if parishioners know too much about us, then, like counselors, we aren't as effective at counseling and caring for others: they see us as flawed and unable to help. We aren't supposed to make friends with the people in our churches because then jealousies arise. We are supposed to be about the other, not about ourselves, so we keep ourselves distant, "above it all", showing infinite patience and understanding: not talking about our own lives except as preaching examples, and certainly NEVER asking for help, personally.

At least that's the plan. Personally, I'm not very good at that. I don't put on an affected voice when I preach. And while I have learned to keep certain things very tight to my chest, mostly I am just myself: and do a mutual exchange with folk about their lives and my life. I will freely admit that this does limit my ministry. I am too well known to be seen as an "authority" figure, most of the time. I am just one of the people in the church doing ministry, like all the other people in the church.

But I can't help but also feel that there is something inately wrong with the "distant pastor" model that we have set up. As I reflected on this week's lectionary passage, I was struck again by what Jesus' message was really about. He did two things in his life: proclaimed that the realm of God was "near" or "here" or "among us" and he proved that by healing, by caring, by loving people as they were, accepting people as they are. He called God "Daddy", not Father. He showed us a God who is not "above" or "affected" or "distant" but one who is close, who is accessible, who is real, who laughs with us and jokes with us (have you read some of the parables? - Jesus had a great sense of humor), who cried with us (like at Lasarus' death), who was even scared at times ("Please take this cup from my lips!"), and who asked for help ("Stay with me. Watch and pray with me"). Jesus was not above or beyond or patient all the time. And if we are supposed to be about following his way and leading as he led, then shouldn't we also model a more accessible, more real, more present ministry?

We claim to believe in the ministry of all believers. If we are all ministers, then my role as pastor is my job in that ministry, just as your work is your job in that ministry. We cannot be above or better than you. We are flawed people, just as everyone else. We need friendship and help, just as everyone else. We are real, and the more we admit that, the less likely we will get into really serious trouble!