The Vaccine-Autism connection, WiFi, and cellphones

This has been a big week for news on the “Environmental Illness” (EI) and Autoimmune Disorder fronts. 

After that blatantly ignorant, one-sided, fear-mongering cover story in Time Magazine, I was pleased to see a much more balanced take in the Inquirer yesterday. 

 

Bernadine Healy, former director of the National Institutes of Health, risked “incurring the wrath of some of my dearest colleagues” to express that opinion in U.S. News & World Report.

“Yes, vaccines are extraordinarily safe and bring huge public health benefit,” she wrote last month. “But vaccine experts tend to look at the population as a whole. . . . And population studies are not granular enough to detect individual metabolic, genetic, or immunological variation that might make some children under certain circumstances susceptible to neurological complications after vaccination.”

 

This is exactly right. Doctor protocols–which sadly seem to be driven by Big Pharma’s bottom line–approach patient care backwards by mandating that what is good for the whole is good for EVERY part. But just because vaccines are good for the general population doesn’t mean that every child can or should receive them. Some kids are just not able to handle vaccines without terrible adverse effects–or at least at the level and frequency of current protocols. 

Geraldine Dawson, chief scientific officer of the advocacy group Autism Speaks, declared that the Poling case “shines a spotlight” on the issue of unusual sensitivities.

“We need to conduct research to better understand and identify subgroups of children who may respond poorly to vaccines,” said the former University of Washington developmental-psychology professor.

These aren’t exactly crackpots folks–these are credentialed, respected people in their fields! We’re talking about a former director of the NIH! It’s insane to keep vaccinating kids with known risk factors–in our case, numerous and severe food allergies and other auto-immune disorders–when so much points to a SERIOUS problem. Someone needs to explain the radical increase of cases of autism in the last few years:

That, they hope, would lead to screening tests to identify children who could benefit from customizing the standard vaccination schedule, which has grown from 10 shots against seven diseases in 1980 to the current 28 shots against 14 diseases, not including the annual flu shot.

It may seem crazy for me to suggest this, but if you want to get a handle on this issue, a pretty good place to start is Jenny McCarthy’s book. Yes, that’s right, THAT Jenny McCarthy:

  Her book tells the story of her son’s autism diagnosis, and how she fought to not let that become a sentence. Ultimately, through hard work, a lot of money, therapy, and a radical diet, she saw her son healed from autism. (Jess and I have done a lot of the same diet things with our boys preemptively, such as going dairy, gluten, and sugar free).  McCarthy has emerged as an unlikely but forceful advocate for a reasonable approach to vaccinations and autism. If you’ve seen one of her frequent appearances on Larry King, you know that she speaks for many who don’t want to do away with vaccines, but want testing (as articulated above) to screen out those who would be harmed from them. 

Another place to start, especially for concerned parents, is Kenneth Bock’s book. Bock is not alone in seeing the precipitous rise in the “4 A” disorders in connection with vaccines and the general toxicity of our modern existence.  

In other news, I was intrigued by the following two stories on EI.

A group of people want the city of Santa Fe, NM to ban WiFi in public places, citing “allergic” reactions. 

Researchers in Britain are making stronger connections between cellphone use and cancer. 

These reports may seem like Luddite quackery to many, but despite guffaws to the contrary, expect to hear a lot more stories like these over the next few years. It’s not without reason that many people have said that cellphones (and similar wireless technology) are the greatest mass experiment in human history. 

We’re the guinea pigs, folks. Remind me, how does it usually turn out for the guinea pig? 

What I’m listening to: The new Al Green/The Roots album

I love Al Green, and have for some time (I trace it back to getting the Pulp Fiction soundtrack with “Let’s Stay Together” on it in ‘95. That led to several other Al albums, including his Gospel stuff). 

I also enjoy The Roots and their live, tight, hip-hop sound. A friend of mine used to work at “The Studio” here in Philly where stringmaster Larry Gold, Amir “?uestlove” Thompson, and the crew recorded & produced just about every big name in music, from Justin Timberlake to John Mayer to Korn. 

So I was real excited when I heard that the Reverend Al would be recording an album with guest vocals from Anthony Hamilton, Corinne Bailey Rae, and John Legend, The Dap-Kings Horns, strings orchestrated by Larry Gold, and “?uestlove” and James Poyser on production. The album, more than any other I’ve heard, recaptures Al’s old school sound, while still bringing in some tight hip-hop sensibilities. The Nu Soul crowd should dig it as well. Here’s the tracklist:

1. Lay it Down

2. Just for Me

3. You’ve Got the Love I Need (feat. Anthony Hamilton)

4. No One Like You

5. What More Do You Want From Me

6. Take Your Time (feat. Corinne Bailey Rae)

7. Too Much

8. Stay With Me (feat. John Legend)

9. All I Need

10. I’m Wild About You

11. Standing in the Rain

12. Wanna Say

Favorite Tracks: You’ve Got the Love I Need, What More Do You Want From Me (with a signature Roots riff), Take Your Time, All I Need, Standing in the Rain–heck, the whole album is great!

Good article on the making of this album:  

http://indangerousrhythm.blogspot.com/2008/04/al-green_03.html

 

In case you missed them: My Top 10 posts

Thanks to everyone who’s become a regular reader of the SENTinel! I’m only a few months in to this thing, but it’s been fun to interact with you–both online and offline–over the topics here. I’ve also enjoyed seeing which posts generate the most interest. Sometimes its surprising. I expected the Coldplay post to get some hits, and it has. It has probably already passed the Atlantic article. 

The Funwall post is surprising. Every day I see people ending up at my site because they google “how to remove funwall” or some similar search. So I know I’m not alone there! 

All in all, this list is a good representation of what I’m trying to do here: three posts on college students/campus ministry, three posts on larger missional/cultural issues, two posts on music, one random post (Funwall), and one “About Me.” 

[Note: The "Top Posts" column to the left seems to indicate what's getting the most action over the last 24 hours or so. The list below is "all-time" (that is, since February).]

 

About Me
Challenge to Men in The Atlantic–Must read!
What’s Coldplay Getting at in “Viva La Vida”?
My Miserable “Fun Wall” experience & an apology
Jubilee ‘08
THIS MANY College Students Pay for Sex?!
Keller on his book, C.S. Lewis, “seeker sensitivity,” and the PCA
Living the High Life in College?!
Have you heard SoulSavers?
Book Review of “UnChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks About Christianity…

When Christian Baseball Players Fight, Hilarity Ensues

Former Phillie centerfielder, UPenn grad, and articulate writer Doug Glanville weighed in on baseball fights at the New York Times the other day. 

This in itself is funny, because Glanville was a reed of a man, a guy who probably weighed 150 lbs. by the end of the season and needed to wrap his belt around himself several times just to keep his uniform on. Glanville sees the irony and tells several funny stories of fights he was involved in during his career. 

I particularly enjoyed his anecdote of Eddie Perez and former Phils pitcher Paul Byrd:

 

The major leagues also had its share of comedy. Take the fight I was in with the Atlanta Braves, when I was a member of the Philadelphia Phillies. Over the course of a week, my teammate Paul Byrd, a pitcher, had unintentionally hit Braves catcher Eddie Perez not once but twice in the back.

Perez and Byrd had once been teammates (and Bible study partners), but Perez had apparently left forgiveness at the door. When Byrd stepped up to the plate for his next at-bat, Perez hit him and then jumped him. Since I was on-deck and the closest player to the fray, I ran over to pry them apart.

The next thing I knew, I was at the bottom of a pile of players, my legs trapped, spikes barely missing my various body parts. The Braves’ Ozzie Guillen evidently decided that the best way to get out of the pile was to pull me out by the head. I had a stiff neck for three days.

What I found interesting was that instead of Perez and Byrd ripping each other’s hair out, they were locked together in a protective embrace, apologizing and praying to get out of this mass of humanity. Everyone within earshot was wondering why we all risked physical harm for a séance.

 

Well, I’m glad Perez and Byrd rediscovered the Christian art of reconciliation at the bottom of a baseball mosh pit.

Full article here. 

Will the rules change for non-profits?

It seems that the tide may be starting to shift against non-profits. Increasingly, the IRS is calling organizations to task for manipulating the rules. I follow this because more than a few pastors I know believe that this could eventually come around to churches, taking away their tax-exempt status. 

This article in the New York Times mentions that certain organizations, like Day Care Centers, are being challenged because they do not give anything away. Certainly some organizations, universities, even things that go under the banner of “ministries,” have been making a ton of money as “non-profits.”

And, concerned about the way some churches are spending money, the Senate Finance Committee has asked for detailed financial information from six evangelical ministries asking them to justify their tax exemptions.

The organizations in question are not actually churches. In fact, they are six of the most prominent televangelists, often appearing on TBN. They are charlatans, and teach a perverse and false version of the Gospel called “prosperity theology.” These people would rebuke Jesus because he didn’t have a home or accumulate worldly wealth. They are Benny Hinn, Paula White, Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, Eddie Long, and Joyce Meyer. They are not representative of historic, evangelical Christianity! 

While most every reputable Christian church and ministry is more than willing to open their books, these folks are infamous for living lavishly with people’s hard-earned cash, and their steadfast refusal to open their books to reputable outsiders. I wholeheartedly applaud the government going after them. These charlatans could likely ruin it for the rest of us, and they should be financially accountable.

But that doesn’t mean all churches abuse the rules. Most churches aren’t in the business of making money, at all. Many have trouble keeping the lights on. Most aren’t in the business of making political endorsements either. Traditionally, it has been recognized that churches and other religious organizations provide benefits to their community, such as their community service and generally uplifting presence. It’s widely known that crime rates are lower in communities where churches reside. But the fear is that local, state, and federal cash-hungry governments could throw the whole baby with the corrupt bathwater, and disregard the many benefits churches offer in their hunger for more taxes. I hope that is not the case. 

My mother-in-law is the CFO for a United Way, and has worked on a national committee in conjunction with the IRS on revising how the IRS interacts with non-profits. She thinks that the IRS needs to change how they evaluate the many non-profits that spring up every year. I hope they will be discerning as they do this, and allow the 99.9% of churches & ministries doing the right thing to keep doing it. 

Full article here.

John Piper answers “Why are Calvinists so negative?”

Piper deals with this question in his usual warm, disarming, and thoughtful way. Sadly, it was necessary for him to do so. Some excerpts:

 

Why are Calvinists so negative?

I love the doctrines of grace with all my heart, and I think they are pride-shattering, humbling, and love-producing doctrines. But I think there is an attractiveness about them to some people, in large matter, because of their intellectual rigor. They are powerfully coherent doctrines, and certain kinds of minds are drawn to that. And those kinds of minds tend to be argumentative.

So the intellectual appeal of the system of Calvinism draws a certain kind of intellectual person, and that type of person doesn’t tend to be the most warm, fuzzy, and tender. Therefore this type of person has a greater danger of being hostile, gruff, abrupt, insensitive or intellectualistic.

I’ll just confess that. It’s a sad and terrible thing that that’s the case. Some of this type aren’t even Christians, I think. You can embrace a system of theology and not even be born again. (Emphasis mine)

 

Whew! Strong words. And absolutely right. Our modern understanding of Christianity is so watered-down with cheap pray-the-prayer profession that we miss the importance of a changed heart. The Bible, as well as great theologians like Jonathan Edwards, have continually pointed the necessity of a changed heart, leading to changed attitudes and behavior (or, as Edwards would say, changed “religious affections.”)

I’m thankful that this was not the kind of Calvinism I was raised in, both in my family and in my church (New Life). It was Gospel-infused and radically humble, self-effacing, and not negative. It was winsome and compassionate towards “outsiders.” Liberti also is in this vein. But in my seminary experience I encountered many of the  ”negative Calvinists” that Piper speaks of. And so I spent as little time on campus as possible. I too was forced to wonder if some of these fellow students were born again. Terribly sad. 

I am as firm a believer as ever in the doctrines of grace, Reformed theology, Augustinian soteriology, Calvinism–whatever you want to call it. But I am saddened by the spirit in which some fellow adherents live out their Calvinism.

I recommend reading the whole article here.

College Students in the News: Environmentally Sustainable Housing @ Oberlin

(Pic: David Maxwell for the New York Times)

NYT has a story on the Sustainability House at Oberlin College in Ohio, part of a growing movement among students at many campuses to minimize their ecological footprint.  This is happening “on campuses nationwide, from small liberal arts colleges like Oberlin and Middlebury, in Vermont, to Lansing Community College in Michigan, to Morehouse in Atlanta, to public universities like the University of New Hampshire.”

Features include the conventional — the old “brick in the toilet tank,” unplugging large appliances, shower timers — to the unconventional — a planned “24-hour energy-use monitoring system” to track “every turn of the faucet, every switch of a light” — to the weird–a picture of the environmentally conscious John Edwards on the ceiling of the shower, ostensibly to encourage faster showers (but more than a little creepy, right?)

The article mentions that one of the students, Becky Bob-Waksberg, was a religious studies major, and that this qualified as diversity, making her a shoo-in for the house. Interesting. I don’t know about Ms. Bob-Waksberg’s faith commitments, but I would hope that more Christian students would find their way to something like this house. I find that Christians students are much more environmentally conscious than their parents or even my generation. In fact, they see it very much as a faith issue, a kingdom/mercy/justice issue, an integrity issue. But perhaps this hasn’t yet been sufficiently recognized by the green movement.

Finally, I found the following paragraph to be a spot-on description of what students are looking for in general: 

 

The mission is serious and yet, like life at the Oberlin house, it blends idealism, hands-on practicality, laid-back community and fun.

“It’s not about telling people, ‘You have to do this, you have to do that,’ ” Mr. Brown said. “It’s about fitting sustainability into our own lives.” And hoping, he added, “that a friend will come over, recognize that it’s fun, start doing it, and then a friend of theirs will start doing it.”

 

This generation is serious about big, macro goals and ideals. But they don’t trust those who take themselves too seriously in pursuing them. They want to pitch in and play a significant part in changing the world. And they want to have fun doing it, together. 

The last sentence is an interesting comment on persuasion. Make no mistake, they want to persuade people to be like them, to do what they’re doing. But they don’t trust more direct methods of persuasion, which they view as coercive. Rather, they want to model the kind of behavior they’d like others to adopt, make it seem fun, and hope that it spreads organically. This is how students today view all types of persuasion and sharing of belief. It must be indirect, non-coercive, fun, and organic.

Now when it comes to faith, it’s possible to go too far in this direction, so that important things are never said. But these less direct methods can also be quite winsome and effective. Regardless, in student ministry it’s clear that students–both Christian and nonChristian–will come to the issue of sharing the faith with these types of expectations, and those working with them have to take that into account. 

Full story from NYT here.

Our New Home

Yesterday Jess and I closed on our new home in Boalsburg (just 4 miles from the Penn State campus). Everything went very smoothly and we’re glad to have made it official!

We won’t be moving in for a while yet. We’re renting the home back to the sellers for the next few weeks before their new place is ready. Then we’ll be getting some work done on the house while we’re in Grove City at summer Staff Training with CCO. We’re going to be taking out some old, cat-infested carpets and putting in some needed hypo-allergenic flooring (haven’t decided between hardwood and laminate yet. Maybe some of both). 

We’ve been really blessed during this process and are still pinching ourselves over this house. We were even more surprised & blessed when we found out the owners would give us a couch, old piano, and their entire master bedroom set for CHEAP–wow! Just some of the many ways God has met us and shown his goodness along the way.

If you ever need a realtor in Centre County, don’t hesitate to use Jill Seybert. We were absolutely thrilled with her. Thanks Jill!

 

 

LBJ, C.S. Lewis, & Jesus on Immortality

I just began reading Doris Kearns Goodwin’s well-regarded 1-volume biography of LBJ. Unlike many biographers, Goodwin had extensive, personal access to LBJ in the latter days of his presidency and before his death. On the first page, she recounts an amazing conversation she had with LBJ only two days before his fatal heart attack:

“Listen,” he began. “I’ve been reading Carl Sandburg’s biography on Lincoln and no matter how great the book’s supposed to be, I can’t bring Lincoln to life. And if that’s true for me, one President reading about another, then there’s no chance the ordinary person in the future will ever remember me. No chance. I’d have been better off looking for immortality through my wife and children and their children in turn instead of seeking all that love and affection from the American people. They’re just too fickle.” 

Whew! What a startling admission. I’m always fascinated by the confessions of those who have reached the absolute summit of their world, and then found it wanting. Yet another confirmation of Jesus’ words: 

What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? (Matthew 16:26; cf. Mark 8:36; Luke 9:25). 

I’m not making any statement about LBJ’s eternal destination. In fact, Billy Graham (in his autobiography) believed that LBJ was a Christian. But on his almost-deathbed, LBJ is articulating with brutal honesty and lucidity the simple truth that what we live for, what we give our very lives for, will inevitably fail to live up to our hopes. 

Would LBJ have been better off investing less in the public and more in his family? Perhaps. But the world is littered with people who gave everything to their families and were also disappointed. The Bible teaches that the longing for immortality is placed in every human heart by God (Eccl. 3:11). Particularly in this materialist society, we don’t know what to do with that longing for eternity. We fill it with all kinds of mismatched parts. Jesus teaches us that we may gain everything the world has to offer, and yet lose what is most important.

Nothing temporal can fill eternity. That’s what LBJ–and thousands of summit-climbers before him–have discovered. Only eternity can fill eternity. 

This is lofty ground, so let me defer to C.S. Lewis, who expressed these things much better than I:

“If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world.”

–Mere Christianity

“If you are really a product of a materialistic universe, how is it that you don’t feel at home there?”

–Encounter with Light

“It now seemed that…the deepest thirst within him was not adapted to the deepest nature of the world.”

–The Pilgrim’s Regress

“Though I do not believe that my desire for Paradise proves that I shall enjoy it, I think it a pretty good indication that such a thing exists and that some men will.”

–Transposition and Other addresses

Thanks to the C.S. Lewis Quote Page for the above quotations. 

What is the Missional Church?

This is an extremely important question for the church going forward. It is still a new concept for many people. There are also lots of competing definitions of “missional.” So I thought I’d share what I found to be a helpful explanation and diagram from Kaleo Church (San Diego). 

 

What is the Missional Church?

There is a distinct philosophical difference from where many evangelical churches begin their philosophy of ministry and the philosophy of the missional church. Popular theory has capitulated to a “Seeker” mentality that is fiercely pragmatic and consumer driven, and I believe ultimately ill equipped to proclaim the gospel in a postmodern western context.  The seeker church begins with a marketing approach to determine the “Target” audience’s needs and desires, and construct a church service and programs to meet those needs. This technique, though strategic and effective, panders to an individualistic and consumer base Christianity that moves into the business of the selling of religious “Goods and services.” This philosophy not only begins with man at the center, but creates programs and services that become the central focus of the mission, which neuters the idea that every Christian is a missionary to their culture. The missional church philosophy begins with the idea that it is God who is on mission for His own purposes and it is the church’s mission to become enlisted in that purpose in the world. To this David Bosch writes, “The term mission presupposes a sender, a person or persons sent by the sender, those to who one is sent, and an assignment.”[2] Verses such as John 20:21 become the interpretive tool for the missional church. This is referred to as the “Missio Dei” (Mission of God). Jesus Christ embodied that mission and sent us. The Holy Spirit empowers that mission, the church is the instrument of that mission, and the culture is the “Context” of that mission. The missional church is called to train missionaries to GO into our culture and be the gospel to their spheres of influence. Therefore the missional church doesn’t shape their programs around Consumeristic Christian needs, but around ministries designed to proclaim the gospel to the non-believer. This is not done as a program but a lifestyle. Adapting a theology of mission from missiologist Leslie Newbigin, George Hunsberger, develops 3 relationships that must occur between the church, gospel and culture:[3] 

 

According to the Gospel and Our Culture Network ( gocn.org), there are at least 12 hallmarks of the “Missional Church:”

1.  The missional church proclaims the Gospel

2.  The missional church is a community where all members are involved in learning to become disciples of Jesus

3.  The Bible is normative in the missional church’s life

4.  The missional church understands itself as different from the world because of its participation in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ

5.  The missional church seeks to discern God’s specific missional vocation for the entire community and all of its members

6.  A missional church community is indicated by how Christians behave toward one another

7.  A missional church is a community that practices reconciliation

8.  People within the missional church community hold themselves accountable to one another in love

9.  The missional church practices hospitality

10.  Missional church worship is the central act by which the community celebrates with joy and thanksgiving both God’s presence and God’s promised future

11.  The missional church community has a vital public witness

12.  There is a recognition that the missional church itself is an incomplete expression of the reign of God

Great stuff!  You can see why I’m excited AND burdened to translate this into campus ministry praxis!

Read the whole article here.

 

 

It’s Gettin’ Missional Up in Here

One of the things I’ve been doing when not raising support or planning our move is developing a missional theology of campus ministry. 

Missional theology has been one of the most important and exciting developments in the Church over the last decade or so. The discussion has fueled a lot of Biblical reflection, innovation, and church planting. 

Surprisingly, this has not carried over to campus ministry. I base this on the fact that very few people are writing on it. In fact, if you google “Missional campus ministry,” most of the initial entries are from yours truly! I don’t say this to brag, but to demonstrate the need for some reflection on missional approaches to campus ministry. 

So I’ve been writing. It’s a reflection on what we’ve been implementing at Temple University and Philadelphia University, and what I hope to be doing at Penn State. If you head over to the Resources section here on my blog, you can find 4 articles I’ve written related to campus ministry. I’ve just posted two on “The Global University,” which ties into the discussion of Global Cities and our flat world. The first two have also been posted over at campusministry.com, where they’ve been among the most active articles on the site. I also got a request from the Catholic Campus Ministry Network (which I granted) to reprint my first article in their monthly newsletter. So that was cool. More articles to come, too. 

Feel free to check them out and let me know what you think! If you’re also a practitioner, let me know! I’d like to eventually gather other missional campus ministry folks to see what might come of it, maybe form a network of sorts. 

You Go Arlen Specter! Keep the heat on the Pats & the NFL!!

Mad props to Arlen Specter for keeping the heat on the NFL and the Patriots. He absolutely HAMMERED them yesterday. This really is remarkable. I don’t remember Tagliabue ever getting called on the carpet like this:

Sen. Arlen Specter on Wednesday called for an independent investigation of the New England Patriots‘ taping of opposing coaches’ signals, possibly similar to the high-profile Mitchell report on performance-enhancing drugs in baseball.

“I have documented the strong factual case that a NFL investigation was neither objective nor adequate,” Specter told ESPN.com on Wednesday evening. “If the commissioner doesn’t move for an independent investigation, then there will be a permanent black mark on the NFL and the Patriots’ record will be historically tainted. Depending on the public reaction, I may ask the Senate Judiciary Committee to hold hearings on the NFL antitrust exemption.”

At an earlier news conference in the Capitol, Specter put it bluntly: “What is necessary is an objective investigation. And this one has not been objective.”

The Pennsylvania Republican was unforgiving of his criticism of NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, saying that Goodell has made “ridiculous” assertions that wouldn’t fly “in kindergarten.” The Senator said Goodell was caught in an “apparent conflict of interest” because the NFL doesn’t want the public to lose confidence in the league’s integrity.

“They are enormous role models for everybody,” Specter said. “If you can cheat in the NFL, you can cheat in college, you can cheat in high school, you can cheat on your grade-school math test. There’s no limit as to what you can do. I think they owe the public a lot more candor and a lot more credibility.”

In case you don’t follow these things, 3-time Super Bowl champion New England Patriots have been caught systematically cheating by taping the signals of opposing teams. This explains the huge advantage the Pats have typically had in the 3rd quarter, and likely explains why they won all 3 of their Super Bowls by 3 points each. 

After the Eagles Super Bowl, several players said it was “crazy” how the Pats seemed to know when a blitz was coming and always had the perfect play called.

The NFL is clearly embarrassed by this and wants it to go away. Despite their  best efforts, “Spygate” has cover-up written ALL OVER IT. It stinks! Specter isn’t taking NFL Commish Roger Goodell’s blatant spin at face value. He’s absolutely right to question why 1) the investigation is taking so long; 2) why it hasn’t been more in-depth, including interviewing more people; and 3) why Goodell thought it was a good idea to DESTROY the tapes in question!  And he’s absolutely right to call for an independent investigation. This is a billion dollar industry that is under-regulated compared to corporations of similar size. They get away with a lot already. Cheating when it comes to that kind of money needs a closer look. 

As far as Goodell’s claim that they’ve found all evidence of wrong-doing, PLEASE! You expect us to believe that with this much smoke, there’s not more fire? With Belichick and Kraft being as arrogant and ruthless as they are? 

You go Arlen. Don’t stop till the truth comes out. (At this point, I’ll take a retroactive Super Bowl over no Super Bowls).

Here’s the link to the articles in the New York Times  and at ESPN.

 

 

Are Introverts Anti-Missional?

Anthony Bradley asked that provocative question over at his blog, The Institute.

I’m been very interested in personality theory, especially lately–another one of my secret projects I’ve been working–so this caught my eye. 

I like Anthony and read his blog often. But in this case I disagree and think the question suffers from category confusion. I’ve weighed in a couple times on the discussion. It’s been interesting (and now in it’s third day as I write this).  

What’s Coldplay Getting at in “Viva La Vida”?

[For my reading of Violet Hill, click here].

I enjoy listening for spiritual/religious themes in pop culture, especially music. Mostly because its all over the place, and often in surprising places.  

Coldplay has long been very fertile ground for this. Though I don’t believe they’ve made any particular profession of faith (like members of U2) much of Coldplay’s lyrics are absolutely DRENCHED in spiritual themes/imagery: Substitute “Jesus” for “Green Eyes” and you’ve got a worship song ready for many Christian settings (and I’ve heard it sung that way!).  I believe that “In My Place” is about the substitutionary atonement of Christ’s death on the Cross for humanity’s sin. (Maybe I’m reading into that a bit, but not much. And I’m not alone).  And my personal favorite, pointed out to me by my 4-year-old Samuel: “Swallowed in the Sea” is about Jonah. Think about it: “You belong with me/not swallowed in the sea.”  Makes total sense if God is singing this to Jonah. That song is known AS “the Jonah song” in our family, and played repeatedly on car trips. 

So it’s been with real interest that I’ve listened to the first two tracks from the new Coldplay album “Viva La Vida” (no, Ricky Martin is not involved, but I’m waiting for the mash-up. How funny/weird would that be?).  The title track doesn’t lack for Christian imagery:

I used to rule the world 
Seas would rise when I gave the word 
Now in the morning I sweep alone 
Sweep the streets I used to own 

I used to roll the dice 
Feel the fear in my enemy’s eyes 
Listen as the crowd would sing: 
“Now the old king is dead! Long live the king!” 

One minute I held the key 
Next the walls were closed on me 
And I discovered that my castles stand 
Upon pillars of salt and pillars of sand 

 

My first instinct is that this is an oblique protest song, and a commentary on the decline of American prestige abroad because of failed attempts at regime change (“the old king is dead”) and the resulting fallout. The first stanza may be a reference to Katrina–the seas didn’t obey that day, and left behind a big mess. 

Who’s speaking? It’s in first person. I imagine Chris Martin putting these words in Dubya’s mouth. The whole song makes much more sense that way. 

Despite the self-assuredness (in some sectors) that the US was carrying out God’s plan, we discovered that our castles were built on sand (allusion to Jesus’ parable in Matthew 7:24-29) and salt (Lot’s wife in Genesis 19:26). 

Then we have what seems to be religious veneer covering up for unjust actions: 

I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing 
Be my mirror my sword and shield 
My missionaries in a foreign field 
For some reason I can’t explain 
I know Saint Peter will call my name 
Never an honest word 
But that was when I ruled the world 
Oooooh Oooooh Oooooh

 

It was the wicked and wild wind 
Blew down the doors to let me in. 
Shattered windows and the sound of drums 
People couldn’t believe what I’d become 

Revolutionaries wait 
For my head on a silver plate 
Just a puppet on a lonely string 
Oh who would ever want to be king? 

I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing 
Roman Cavalry choirs are singing 
Be my mirror my sword and shield 
My missionaries in a foreign field 
For some reason I can’t explain 
I know Saint Peter will call my name 
Never an honest word 
But that was when I ruled the world 
(Ohhhhh Ohhh Ohhh) 

 

That’s my take. I could be totally wrong. Your thoughts? 

Wikipedia now gaining credibility?

As soon as Wikipedia got big, it became fashionable to bash on it: “But it’s not a scholarly source.”  True enough, and it wasn’t hard to find entries that lacked credibility. But kudos to Wikipedia for recognizing their limitations, and taking steps to address them. 

To reach its goal of academic standards, said Wikipedia’s web site, it set up an assessment scale on its English-language site. The best encyclopedia entries are ranked as “Featured Articles,” and run each day on the home page atwww.wikipedia.com.

To be ranked as a “Featured Article,” Wikipedia said an entry must “provide thorough, well-written coverage of their topic, supported by many references to peer-reviewed publications.”

Of more than 10 million articles in 253 languages, only about 2,000 have reached “Featured Article” status, it said

Now some folks in higher ed are beginning to embrace Wikipedia as part of the academic process. This included assigning students to write a Wikipedia entry in lieu of a term paper:

 

As an experiment, last January [Prof. Jon] Beasley-Murray [of Latin American literature at the University of British Columbia] promised his students a rare A+ grade if they got their projects for his literature course, called “Murder, Madness and Mayhem,” accepted as a Wikipedia Featured Article.”

In May, three entries created by nine students in the course became the first student works to reach Wikipedia’s top rank.

Their articles, about the book “El Senor Presidente” by Nobel prize-winning Guatemalan author Miguel Ángel Asturias, ran May 5 on Wikipedia’s home page..Monica Freudenreich, who worked on the Asturias entry, said she liked the fact her contribution will survive online. Usually term papers “end up in a binder than eventually sits under my bed,” she wrote on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia itself invites professors “to use Wikipedia in your class to demonstrate how an open content website works (or doesn’t).”

But the experiment has had controversies, including student work that was instantly deleted as not “notable.”

 

What do you think of Wikipedia’s growing academic cred? Is this an isolated incident, or are you seeing professors and higher ed in general becoming more open to the role of an open-source content provider? At the end of the day, do you see much of a difference between traditional expressions of knowledge and Wikipedia? 

I have to confess, I’m partly interested in this because I’ve been developing another open-source project (much more limited scope than Wikipedia, but still useful I believe). It’s still a work-in-progress so I’m not ready to unveil it yet, but the issues of credibility in relation to open-sourcing are very much relevant.

The Worst Church Marketing Ever?

Bad Church Marketing is surely one of the most embarrassing things about being a Christian. You’ve seen it, you’ve heard it. If you’re not a Christian, you wonder “What’s WITH those whack jobs?”  If you’re a Christian, you wonder “What’s WITH these whack jobs?”  My brother-in-law sent this to me. This has to be one of the worst, most embarrassing pieces of church marketing I’ve ever seen. 

I don’t know this guy or this church. I can’t comment on their ministry, good or ill.

But even if this is meant to be ironic–which I sure hope it is–it’s still embarrassing. 

WWJD indeed. 

 

Coed ROOMS Becoming Increasingly Common

I’m hearing more reports about colleges going with coed rooms. You read that right, not coed dorms, but coed ROOMS. As in a guy and a girl sharing a room.

I have one question in response to this:

WHY?!

This is a bad idea on so many levels.

I have a hard time imagining a college-age guy wanting to live with a girl, without having ONE THING on his mind, unless he’s totally emasculated. “But we’re just friends!” Dude, PLEASE!! You’re not fooling anyone. 

Women, let me take you aside for a moment. Do you realize that you’re subjecting yourself to the sounds and smells of a man within a small, enclosed space?

Oh, you say you’ll be able to keep all that in check, that he’ll be considerate to you?

Are you kidding me? Not if you’re “just friends.” 

Parents, are you ok with your daughters (and sons) putting themselves in this position? 

Schools, why would you subject yourself to an even greater headache in dealing with couples who break up but are still living together? Are you sure you want to hop on that emotional roller coaster with them?  Dormcest is destructive enough–but roomcest? Very bad news. 

I attribute this phenomenon to the general confusion over gender and gender roles in our society. I also attribute it to the overflow from the “shacking up” trend, where couples believe the myth that living together will “work” and be a good trial/practice run for getting married. Studies have shown that cohabiting doesn’t prepare people for marriage, but for divorce. 

Students, parents, what do you think? Do you know anyone doing this? Would you recommend it? Why or why not? 

Here’s the AP story on the coed room trend. 

Here’s a video clip on the story. Warning: the anchor banter is especially lame (and a little creepy).