Junk Food Blog

Check Out the Junk Food Blog! It will either make you hungry. Or sick. Your choice!

Church Values

What are people looking for in a church? This interesting post was posted by new doctoral student at Fuller Seminary, C. Wess Daniels. Wess is a Quaker (Friend), which should please my friend Bob Ramsey, to no end. Wess has some core values, and secondary values.
Core Values

1. Jesus-Oriented Practices and Theology


2. Surrounding Community Involvement


3. Equality of Humanity


4. Peace church


5. Tradition Relationship


6. Move of the Spirit

Secondary Values

1. Position to American Politics


2. Creativity Oh Yes The Ancient Arts


3. Small church


4. Non-hieracrchical Leadership


5. Sacramental Life

Sounds sort of eclectic, doesn't it? Some of this is typical of Quakers, some of it is typical of Presbyterians.

Curmudgeon Alert

Doug Groothius has posted Antidote to Celebrity-Centric Insanity. Good words.

Here are some curmudgeonly tools in the struggle against entertainment celebritism.

1. Do not read stories about them.


2. When in stores, cover up celebrity magazines and books with more thoughtful magazines and books or turn the covers around.


3. Don't refer to them in sermons; or if you do, do so only negatively.


4. Do not dress like them.


5. Do not speak like them.


6. Do not watch them on television.


7. Do not attend their ridiculous movies.


8. Don't strike celebrity-like poses--for cameras or otherwise.


9. Pray the celebrities will repent of their shabby, hollow, and empty egoism and embrace the Kingdom of God.


10. Fill your mind with ancient and more modern thinkers whose ideas last and bless: Augustine, Pascal, Jonathon Edwards, C.S. Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, Os Guinness, and so on.


11. Read biographies of great and godly people.


12. Get interested in the lives of the people you are near you, people you love, people you can influence for righteousness.

15 Do not love the world or anything in the world. If you love the world, love for the Father [a] is not in you. 16 For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful people, the lust of their eyes and their boasting about what they have and do—comes not from the Father but from the world. 17 The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever. - 1 John 2:15-17

Jacoby on Muslim Violence

Interesting column by Jeff Jacoby on Islamic violence in Somalia, from last week.

Muslim violence
By Jeff Jacoby | September 20, 2006

AS SHE LAY dying in a Mogadishu hospital, Sister Leonella forgave her killers. She had lived in Africa for almost four decades and could speak fluent Somali, but her last words were murmured in Italian, her mother tongue. ``Perdono, perdono," she whispered. I forgive, I forgive.

She was 65 and had devoted her life to the care of sick mothers and children. She was on her way to meet three other nuns for lunch on Sunday when two gunmen shot her several times in the back. "Her slaying was not a random attack," the Associated Press reported. It "raised concerns" that she was the latest victim of "growing Islamic radicalism in the country."

Raised concerns? Sister Leonella was gunned down less than two days after a prominent Somali cleric had called on Muslims to kill Pope Benedict XVI for his remarks about Islam in a scholarly lecture last week.

``We urge you, Muslims, wherever you are to hunt down the pope for his barbaric statements," Sheik Abubukar Hassan Malin had exhorted worshippers during evening prayers at a Mogadishu mosque. "Whoever offends our prophet Mohammed should be killed on the spot by the nearest Muslim." Sister Leonella was not the pope, but she was presumably close enough for purposes of the local jihadists.

If it weren't so sickening, it would be farcical: A line in the pope's speech suggests that Islam has a dark history of violence, and offended Muslims vent their displeasure by howling for his death, firebombing churches, and attacking innocent Christians. One of the points Benedict made in his speech at the University of Regensburg was that religious faith untethered by reason can lead to savagery. The mobs denouncing him could hardly have done a better job of proving him right.

In his lecture, Benedict quoted the late Byzantine emperor Manuel II, who had condemned Islam's militancy with these words: "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

In the ensuing uproar, British Muslims demonstrated outside Westminster Cathedral with signs reading "Pope go to Hell" and "Islam will conquer Rome," while the head of the Society of Muslim Lawyers declared that the pope must be "subject to capital punishment." In Iraq, the radical Mujahideen's Army vowed to "smash the crosses in the house of the dog from Rome" and the Mujahideen Shura Council swore to ``continue our jihad and never stop until God avails us to chop your necks." Arsonists in the West Bank set churches on fire, and a group calling itself ``The Sword of Islam" issued a warning: ``If the pope does not appear on TV and apologize for his comments, we will blow up all of Gaza's churches."

In fact, the pope did apologize, more than once. Whether the studied frenzy will now subside remains to be seen. But it's only a matter of time until the next one erupts.

This time it was a 14th-century quote from a Byzantine ruler that set off -- or rather, was exploited by Islamist firebrands to ignite -- the international demonstrations, death threats, and violence. Earlier this year it was cartoons about Mohammed in a Danish newspaper. Last year it was a Newsweek report, later debunked, that a Koran had been desecrated by a US interrogator in Guantanamo. Before that it was Jerry Falwell's comment on "60 Minutes" that Mohammed was a "terrorist." Back in 1989 it was the publication of Salman Rushdie's satirical novel, "The Satanic Verses."

In every case, the pretext for the Muslim rage was the claim that Islam had been insulted. Freedom of speech was irrelevant: While the rioters and those inciting them routinely insult Christianity, Judaism, and other religions, they demand that no one be allowed to denigrate Islam or its prophet. It is a staggering double standard, and too many in the West seem willing to go along with it. Witness the editorials in US newspapers this week scolding the pope for his speech. Recall the State Department's condemnation of the Danish cartoons last winter.

Of course nobody's faith should be gratuitously affronted. But the real insult to Islam is not a line from a papal speech or a cartoon about Mohammed. It is the violence, terror, and bloodshed that Islamist fanatics unleash in the name of their religion -- and the unwillingness of most of the world's Muslims to say or do anything to stop them.

Jeff Jacoby's e-mail address is jacoby@globe.com.

People are afraid in this country of an oppressive government that seems bent on overturning free speech. Uh-huh. Some bloggers take delight in all sorts of vile names for the president, mildly calling him "the chimp." And yet, they are not arrested. Not thrown in jail. Not tortured. Not forbidden from juvenile name calling.

And yet, when the Pope makes an academic reference in a scholarly speech to a 500 year old debate, a nun is murdered in cold blood. Where was the outrage in the New York Times? Where was the outrage in the Los Angeles Times? Where were the Islamic clerics who condemned this? Where was CAIR? (CAIR cited an article in the Orlando Sentinel, but I can't find any direct CAIR condemnation on their web site.)

Perhaps there is not difference between the two. Right.

There is an old saw about getting involved in politics, about wrestling in the mud with a pig. Both parties get muddy, and the pig likes it.

Does College Help Students Learn Civics?

A new report is out by the ISI, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, on knowledge of civics by college students. Here. The news is not good. Some findings?

• In summary, though a university education can cost upwards of $200,000 and the average under-graduate leaves campus $19,300 in debt, they are no better off than when they arrived in terms of acquiring knowledge about key areas of America's constitutional and economic systems.


• Responses from college seniors to a selection of individual questions display how little they actually know about basic historical facts, ideas, and concepts germane to meaningful participation in American civic life.


• Seniors lack basic knowledge of America's history. More than half, 53.4 percent, could not identify the correct century when the first American colony was established at Jamestown. And 55.4 percent could not recognize Yorktown as the battle that brought the American Revolution to an end (28 percent even thought the Civil War battle at Gettysburg the correct answer).


• College seniors are also ignorant of America's founding documents. Fewer than half, 47.9 percent, recognized that the line "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal," is from the Declaration of Independence. And an overwhelming majority, 72.8 percent, could not correctly identify the source of the idea of "a wall of separation" between church and state.


• More than half of college seniors did not know that the Bill of Rights explicitly prohibits the establishment of an official religion for the United States.


• Nearly half of all college seniors, 49.4 percent, did not know that The Federalist Papers—foundational texts of America's constitutional order—were written in support of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Seniors actually scored lower than freshmen on this question by 5.7 percentage points, illustrating negative learning while at college.


• More than 75 percent of college seniors could not identify that the purpose of the Monroe Doctrine was to prevent foreign expansion in the Western Hemisphere.


• Even with their country at war in Iraq, fewer than half of seniors, 45.2 percent, could identify the Baath party as the main source of Saddam Hussein's political support. In fact, 12.2 percent believed that Saddam Hussein found his most reliable supporters in the Communist Party. Almost 5.7 percent chose Israel.

Here is one of my favorite findings:

• Learning per course increased significantly when faculty maintained higher homework standards among their students. For example, seniors at Grove City College, which ranked fourth in civic learning, spent an average of 20 hours per week on homework, compared to 14 hours at Georgetown (which ranked 43rd in civic learning), and 15 hours at Berkeley (49th). When colleges expect their students to spend substantial time studying, learning improves significantly.

Imagine that! The more time you study, the more you learn! Why hadn't I thought of that?

Here are some of the questions they used for the study. Take it. I dare you. And let me know how you do.

A Religion of Peace/Hate Speech

The President is fond of calling Islam a "religion of peace." Uh-huh. So we come across on a regular basis articles like this one, Nigeria clamps curfew on town after churches burnt. This news from late last week has only been picked up by Reuters in the MSM, but also by some religious news outlets, here and here.

Evidently, a Christian woman made some derogatory remarks concerning Muhammed during a debate in a marketplace. She was arrested for blasphemy, but then released. According the the articles, local Muslims demanded that she be stoned to death. Religious tolerance?

I wonder why this has not gotten much news coverage. Nothing from AP, or UPI, nor the BBC, nor ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN. Is it because this is politically incorrect to highlight Muslim violence against Christians? Or is it because this is so commonplace that it is hardly "news" when churches and shops are burned down because of one woman's comment(s) in the marketplace?

It is hard to determine what the woman actually said, and whether it was, indeed, blasphemous. However, speech seems to be only in the eyes of the beholder these days. An article earlier this year in the San Francisco Chronicle details how "hate speech" legislation is being interpretted and applied.

• Roman Catholic Robert Smith is fired from an appointment on the Washington Metro transit authority board by Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich for the crime of saying that he doesn't approve of homosexuality.


• Journalist and author Oriana Fallaci cannot visit her native country of Italy for fear of being thrown in prison because of a lawsuit brought against her by the Italian Muslim Union for the crime of "defaming Islam."


• British neo-Nazi David Irving is sentenced to three years in prison in Austria for a 1989 speech in which he committed the crime of Holocaust denial.


• College Republican Steve Hinkle is found guilty by California Polytechnic State University (San Luis Obispo) for "disruption" for the crime of putting up a flyer advertising a black conservative speaker.

What do the above examples have in common? They are the logical outgrowth of a dangerous trend sweeping the Western world: the criminalization and censorship of speech.

It is frightening when differing opinions cannot be shared without fear of these bloody and violent reprisals. And we cannot say, "Hey, it's only Africa", because this sort of redefining of hate speech is happening in the West as well.

Sermonic Plagiarism

Great post and reflection by Brent Thomas about pastors plagiarizing sermons. Brent is responding to an article written by Steve Sjogren at Pastor.com which seems to advocate pastors using other pastors' material.

Of course, every pastor does this to some degree. There is some debate about how much original thought there is these days. We all read commentaries, and other theologians and pastors as we prepare to preach. However, my own rule of thumb is that I will always give credit where credit is due.

For example, at an installation service yesterday for my friend and colleage, Adam Donner, I preached about the discipleship cycle in Mark's gospel. This was an old idea from our Inter Varsity Mark Manuscript days. But I first heard it, or read about it, from Dr. William Lane. I had recently heard some old "lectures" by William Lane on the podcast by Michael Card, who had been mentored by Bill Lane. My first class at seminary was on Mark's gospel, taught by visiting professor William Lane. So, I adapted Lane's points, and passed them on in my brief sermon. However, I did give credit to him for the initial ideas behind the sermon.

That I understand. But to steal someone else's sermon, and preach it as one's own, makes little sense to me. It removes the authenticity and the power of it, as sermons are living things, preached in a particular context, to a particular people, by a partcular person. One can duplicate the words, but not the context. And there is no such thing as a contextless sermon, try as we might to create one.

Nice job, Brent. Keep up the good work.

A Pantheon for Monotheists

From WSJ's Best of the Web. Citing an original article entitled America is revealed as one nation under four faces of God, BOTW listed the four faces of God.

Nearly a third of Americans, 31.4 per cent, believe in an Authoritarian God, angry at earthly sin and willing to inflict divine retribution--including tsunamis and hurricanes. . . .

At the other end of the scale is the Distant God, seen by 24.4 per cent as a faceless, cosmic force that launched the world but leaves it alone. . . .

The Benevolent God, popular in America's Midwest among mainstream Protestants, Catholics and Jews, is one that sets absolute standards for man, but is also forgiving--engaged but not so angry. Caring for the sick is high on the list of priorities for these 23 per cent of believers. . . .

The Critical God, at 16 per cent, is viewed as the classic bearded old man, judgmental but not going to intervene or punish, and is popular on the East Coast.

That adds up to 94.8%, which leaves some room for other conceptions of God. Here are some we thought of:

* Totalitarian God. He is everywhere, and he is watching you.

* Multitasking God. Answers prayers by phone, fax and BlackBerry, all at the same time.

* Noncommittal God. Loves his children, but isn't "in love" with them.

Isn't this fun? If you can think of other "Gods," send them along and we'll publish a list of the best.

BOTW continues with the full list, submitted by readers.

• Passive-aggressive God. "Go ahead, sin if you want to. Don't worry about my wrath."


• Obsessive-compulsive God. Washes his hands of us hundreds of times a day.


• Narcissistic God. Worships himself.


• Codependent God. Enables us to sin so that we'll need him.


• Dyslexic God. "For he so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Puppy . . ."


• Hypothermic God. "Many are cold, but few are frozen."


• Hippocratic God. So powerful, he thinks he's a doctor.


• Jewish mother God. "My children--I gave them life, but do they pray?"


• Common-law God. Since the beginning of time has assumed sole responsibility for Godlike acts, but has not legally been established as "God."


• Customer service God. "Press 1 for the Father, 2 for the Son, 3 for the Holy Spirit."


• Unitarian God. Nice enough guy, but doesn't really seem to believe in himself.


• Progressive God. Has outgrown the simplistic belief in his own literal existence, considers himself spiritual but not religious.


• Liberal God. Commands man to "be fruitless and divide"; is completely self-absorbed yet doesn't believe in himself; wants you to stop sinning but doesn't have an alternative; can't stop yelling, "Satan lied, people died!"


• Peace activist God. He's sending you to hell, but he supports the sinners!


• Cindy Sheehan God. Wants George W. Bush to tell him what "noble cause" his Son died for.


• Darwinian God. Possessed of an exquisite set of irony, he has divided mankind into two groups: those who believe that the most powerful biological force is the tendency of a population to be dominated by its most quickly reproducing members, and those who are actually reproducing.


• Planned Parenthood God. One Child is enough.


• New York Times God. Is angry only when people question the accuracy of his publication or his wisdom in divulging secret plans devised in the hearts of men.


• Reuters God. "One God's terrorist is another's freedom fighter."


• Rush Limbaugh God. "Talent on loan from me."


• Hippie God. Must have been on something when he created the world.


• United Nations God. Reaffirming that you are a sinner, he calls upon you to repent and decides to remain actively seized of this matter. If you ignore his call to repent, he will call upon you to repent again.


• CIA God. Knows everything, but lacks the resources to process and analyze it.


• George W. Bush God. Responsible only for evil.


• Sports God. Similar to Distant God, but occasionally intervenes when a big play is needed.


• Hertz Rent-a-God. He puts you in the driver's seat.


• Avis Rent-a-God. He tries harder.


• Enterprise Rent-a-God. He'll pick you up.


• Visa God. He's everywhere you want him to be.


• MasterGod. Priceless.


• American Express God. Don't leave home without him.


• Budweiser God. This God's for you.


• Windows God. Plug and pray.


• Google God. For those who are always searching.


• Frugal God. Jesus saves.


• Chairman God. Sets the agenda, but doesn't get involved in day-to-day operations.


• Micromanager God. Not a sparrow falls but he needs a report on why, with guidance on what to do about it.


• Soccer God. How about a pray date with his Son?


• Schroedinger's God. Either exists or doesn't, and the act of looking changes the answer.

A few readers mentioned the 1977 film "Oh, God!" in which George Burns portrayed the Almighty as an avuncular old man. We would have liked to have seen Groucho Marx in the role: "Last night I smote a heathen in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas, I'll never know."

And who said conservatives do not have a sense of humor?

More Bizarre Headlines

• McDonald's throws weight behind obesity research


• Bottled water beats cancer in lab study


• Blog of accused killer reveals dark character (No kidding!)


• Defendant Seeks Delay Because Deer Season Could Reduce Jury Pool

(HT Best of the Web)

Divorce When Kids Go Away to College

Scot McKnight has a marvelous post on the pastoral side of being a professor. He writes movingly about students who come see him because their parents are going through a divorce. As moving as the original post is, the comments in response are downright painful to read. Any doubts that we live in a broken world?

That Personal Touch

I know this will be a bit ironic, but hang with me. Several days ago, I was at Scot McKnight's website, Jesus Creed. I read a post I liked, and left a comment. Later that day, when I checked my email, I found a nice note from Scot thanking me for my contribution to his blog. I was touched. I have admired McKight's scholarly work for many years, and am glad to see him blogging. But with someone as busy as he is to send an email to someone who left one comment on their blog seems extraordinary to me. Thanks, Scot!

When I began blogging in 2004, the person most responsible for that was Hugh Hewitt. Now, I know some of the dozen people who read this blog may not like Hewitt, and disagree with his political positions, which is fine. And yet, back in 2004, after my mom's death, I emailed Hugh on a couple of issues. He emailed me back several times, encouraging me in my blogging efforts, and offering condolences for my loss of my mom. I was impressed. Here was a guy who has a nationally sydicated radio program, and he took the time to email little ol' me.

For me, these personal touches inspire a certain degree of loyalty in me. I know, being "touched" by a few emails, a very impersonal electronic form of communication to be sure, seems a little odd. And yet, there it is. There is a desire in human beings for connection. And the Internet provides some of that. I worry about people who live on the internet, and do not interact with flesh and blood people in a flesh and blood way. It seems pretty tough to love your neighbor electronicly.

I have tried to continue the influence of Scot and Hugh by responding to all who comment on this blog, all five of you! I also try to respond to all my students' questions at APU. My class attendance is taken via 3x5 cards. On one side, the students put their name and date. The opposite side is for them to ask any question(s) they want, from "What is your favorite vacation spot?" to "What is the unforgivable sin?". From the mundane to the profound, I try to engage my students in electronic dialogue. I am nowhere near as influential as Scot or Hugh, but in my own way, I am trying to acknowledge each student and encourage them. It's that old Barnabas thing that I cannot seem to shake. Once again, thanks Scot and Hugh.

Funny Videos

Michael Kruse has done it again. Maybe you should just stop reading this blog and go read his. He posts a hilarious video from YouTube about a Toilet Flushing Cat. He follows this up with a post about a kid who has a spot-on imitation of the president.

So there you have it, a link (Kruse) to a link (YouTube) for an early morning chuckle. Except for those on the east coast, for whom it is almost lunchtime already.

Greek and Hebrew Humor

Thanks to Michael Kruse's keen eye, here are two links to humor relating to learning the biblical languages of Greek and Hebrew.

First, Dr. Seuss Learns Greek, a hilarious takeoff on "Green Eggs and Ham".




Next, we have "Abbott and Costello Learn Hebrew", a witty takeoff on "Who's on First?"

Who knew learning languages could be so much fun? Oh? What's that? This is only making fun of learning the languages? Well, it's easier than actually learning declensions.

My Greek professor, Sam Gantt, brought in a video of Monty Python's "Life of Brian" to watch before our Greek final exam. It was, of course, the "Romans Go Home" scene. We were rolling on the floor with laughter, knowing how hard we had worked at declensions, and verb tenses. It put us in the right mood to take an exam.

Ouch!

"God has promised forgiveness to your repentance, but He has not promised tomorrow to your procrastination."--St. Augustine (354-430)

Remembering 9/11

Today is the fifth anniversary of two planes crashing into the Twin Towers', and the towers' subsequent collapse in New York City. I am not sure why the 5th anniversary is any more memorable than, say, the 3rd anniversary, but we like to have things in numberical order, and 5, 10, 15, seem like reasonable markers. This picture shows a steel cross in the wreckage. (HT Kruse Kronicle)

In every age, in the midst of destruction and despair, the cross shows us of God's presence in the midst of suffering. I am not sure how we ever got the theological concept of God being immutable, or impervious to our suffering. But I am pretty convinced that is not the case. Why would Jesus weep over Jerusalem if that were the case?

It is a good day to remember:

1) How suddenly life can end, and how precious each moment of life really is.

2) The heroes of 9/11, the firemen and policemen, and ordinary citizens who did extraordinary things, some at the cost of their own lives.

3) The families of those who died. The wives. The husbands. The children. The friends and neighbors.

4) That there is evil in this world, and it needs to be resisted, in as many forms as we can.

5) That "though the wrong seems oft so strong, God is the ruler yet."

An Unpleasant Anniversary

In the hustle and bustle of school starting for the kids, soccer starting for me, school starting for me, a new job for Beth (leaving the old one and starting the new one), I missed posting on a significant event. A year ago, my dad passed away suddenly. I blogged about it here and here.

There has not been a day that goes by that I have not thought about my dad. I was just sent a reminder from FTD that Sunday is Grandparents' Day. When I read that, I suddenly got a tear in my eye, and thought, "My kids don't have any more grandparents." Well, actually, they do. My mom's husband, Kel, is still in Aptos, though we rarely see him. And Susan, my dad's wife, is in Minnesota. We are in more contact with Susan, and hope to encourage her to come for a SoCal Dizzyland visit sometime in the near future. Still, the four biological grandparents are now gone.

I am preaching at Eagle Rock Presbyterian Church this Sunday. I am reworking my two sermons on the prodigal son and the elder brother from Luke 15, that I preached at Aracadia Presbyterian Church in July. To hear them, click here, highlight "2006" and then highlight "July", and then the sermons on the 23rd and the 30th. But I digress.

Luke 15 has been speaking to me as I wrestle with it in preparation to preach, and as I wrestle with my dad's death. In the parable, a presumably irreligious son insults his religious father and leaves for the far country. He comes home, eventually, and reconciles with his father.

As I ponder that, I am struck by the fact that I was a religious son (though not always so), and I wound up insulting and leaving my own non-religious father. I left when my mom and brother and I moved to Californai after the parents' divorce. I "left" when I chose to become a follower of Jesus. I know that my dad was at one time a religious fellow. He had joined a church. I even have his read Revised Standard Version of the whole Bible, published, I think, in 1952. Ironic. The prodigal son, in reverse, sort of.

What caused my dad to walk away? Why did he leave the church? I know my mom left the Catholic church of her childhood in order to marry my dad, a Protestant. I guess these sorts of issues were much more serious then than now. But at some point, my dad stopped going to church. Why?

For years, my dad and I have done a dance. Since we are both men, we had between us four left feet, I suppose. In my own naive way, I had hoped at some point to be reconciled to me dad. I recognized that he had hurt me as a child, and divorcing my mom was the last straw for me. But as I matured, I came to understand that I had hurt him, too.

One night, while visiting him in Minnesota, I borrowed his car and drove to see my friends in St. Anthony Village, where I grew up. I came back quite late. My dad was already in bed. The trouble was, my brother and I were flying back to California the next day. And my choosing to spend my last evening in Minnesota with my friends evidently wounded my dad. And as an angry teenager, I suppose that was the point. I didn't really care at that time, but I grew to care.

When Beth and I got married, we send a wedding invitation to my dad, and did not include Susan's name on the invitation. Intentional? It probably was on my part. But it was stupid and foolish. One more nail. One more drop of blood. One more wound as payback.

Before my trip in August to pick up my dad's tools, a friend asked me if my dad tried to keep in touch with me when I was still in Minnesota. I know that my brother used to see my dad and Susan quite often, but I did not. I had no memory of being invited over to their house. So when I got back there, I asked Susan about it. She said that she and my dad cooked up all sorts of ways to entice me to come over, but all to no avail. She then said something about me probably not wanting to disappoint my mom, since I was her favorite.

All of a sudden, I was 13-14 years old again. Since neither of my parents were very good at talking to us kids about meaningful or hurtful issues, it was left to me to decipher what was going on. The vibe I picked up from my mom was something like this: "I do not mind you going to see your father, but I will be very hurt if you do." So, I felt forced to choose between my mom and my dad. And, as luck would have it, I chose my mom.

It is unfair to put a kid through that sort of choice, but my parents did not know any better. My mom was bitter and angry that her lover, her husband, had abandoned her for another (in her eyes). My dad was most likely hurt and puzzled that the mother of his children was trying to punish him through them. It didn't work with my brother, who was either too young to know any of this, or just wired not to care. He had two parents, what was the big deal?

The thing that brought me up short in response to Susan's question was this: I feel like I am still having to choose. I am here, in my dad's house, talking with his wife in their kitchen, and my mom suddenly is the bad person for doing this bad thing. Ouch.

Anyway, back to the parable and the dance. I have a box of letters I wrote my dad over the years. He evidently thought them worth keeping. That's my hope. My suspicion, though, is that he just wasn't very good at throwing things away. In those letters, a very young me tried his best to convince his dad that he loved him, and had forgiven him. The response to all this outpouring of emotion, silence. Oh, I got bithday cards, many very humorous, signed, "Love, Dad". I got Christmas presents each year, and the grandkids did, too.

The first person I called when my son, Mark, was born, was my dad. "Hey, dad, I have a son, too. And you have a grandson."

But I never got any confirmation that the letters had been received. I never got an acknowledgement from my dad that he was sorry for the hurt I experienced, whether he was to blame directly or not. I never received a word of, "It's OK, son, I forgive you."

Perhaps my dad was not good with words. He was, I think, better at his actions than his words. But he did write several very glowing letters to my brother, Dave. Dave has one framed on his office wall. So I know my dad could write. So why not? Isn't this what parents do? Don't parents love their kids no matter what? When the kids are surly teenagers, and will not talk, don't parents keep trying to talk? Keep trying to affirm the good, and chastise the wrong? Isn't a parent's love an anchor for kids to cling to through the terrible emotional upheavals of adolescence? (I know, this appears to be descending to a massive pity party, doesn't it?)

The deal is, I made some pretty feeble attempts to reconcile with my dad. I didn't work on it very hard, because I thought there would always be more time. He was, after all, only 74 years old, and in pretty good shape for a man that age.

As the prodigal son came home, what sort of "welcome" was he expecting? Folded arms and a frown? A lecture? A scolding? He got the last thing he ever expected: a father who embarrassed himself in public by running to him, and giving him a great big hug, and kisses, and tears of joy, and a robe and a ring and sandals and a huge party!

From my end, I tried coming home several times, and was met with silence. I perceived the silence to be arms folded. Shut out. A formal welcome, yes. Come in, stay a while. But we can't talk about anything in the past.

In my head, I imagine my dad tried to reach out to me, too. Though I am not sure exactly how. He did pay the alimony and child support each month. He remembered my birthday.

He once called me when it was not my birthday. When the Simi Valley trial of the cops who beat Rodney King were acquitted. And the LA Riots began. The TV was full of pictures of fire and smoke and guns and looting. My dad called and asked if we were all right. I told him we were close to the action, but not that close, and we were, in fact, safe.

In my head, I can believe that I greeted my dad's attempts with folded arms and silence.

So there's the dance. Feeble attempts to reach out, not exactly rebuffed, but certainly not met with open arms. So each of us would retreat behind our old patterns.

I am not sure how much my dad thought about me, but I thought about him all the time. And I still do.

And I have decided, that come hell or high water, I will try as best I can to be open and welcoming to my kids. I do not want to be the arms folded sort of person I can be, quite easily. I want to be transformed by God's amazing grace into a more grace-filled person. And I want the pain that I feel to remind me of the consequences for living an unforgiving life.

I am sorry, dad, for the hurt caused you. I wish we could have just an hour to go fishing together, or to just talk over spaghetti at Vescio's, or a sizzling platter of steak at Lindy's. You once told me that all you wanted was an hour with your father, to ask him all the questions you now had, but did not consider important while you were younger. I know know what that feels like. I grew up angry at you. Rejecting you. When I became a Christian, I learned to love you. But I also learned to judge you. And you know, dad, that being judgmental comes as a family trait. Like Ray Kinsella in "Field of Dreams", I wanted to "come home", and never knew how.

Perhaps someday, we will have that chance to go fishing, or to have that chat. I miss you, dad, and I grieve the lost opportunities. And as usual, I condemn myself for the pain. My penance, my atonement, is to love Susan and the boys, and to love my brother Dave and his family, and to love the wife and son and daughter I have been so graciously given. But nothing I do will replace the hole in my heart, and knowing that some of that hole is self-inflicted only makes it worse.

It has been a year. And it feels like this morning.

In or Out?

Soccer is often called "the beautiful game", for when it is played well, it is beautiful to watch. As a referee trainer, some of the laws of the game are difficult to grasp at first, especially for new referees who have never played soccer. I came across this cartoon somewhere and thought I would post it. Just for fun.

Welcome to High School

The more things change, the more they remain the same. When I was in high school, lo these many years ago, one of our favorite activities was to TP someone's house. You know, take a few rolls of toilet paper, and string it over trees, phone lines, around shrubs, through fences, etc. Just to make the person feel "special".

This morning, we awoke to a front yard full of TP. Since my son, Mark, is a senior, and one of the Student Body officers, we figured this was for him. Rachel went out and discovered that inside a big TP heart was "RS". The whole TP mess was for her! She gleefully came into the house saying, "They TP-ed the house for ME!" She was thrilled, and is not even upset about having to clean it up.

Welcome to high school, Rachel.