stream of consciousness

Here’s what’s on my mind this Friday morning:

  • The cup of coffee I’m sipping while I type is righteous. Perfectly brewed (by me) Pike Place. Is there anything better than an awesome cup of coffee when you wake up tired and slightly cold?
  • I returned the Windows Phone platform after significant time away, and I still love it. If they could get their app store juiced (and it’s much better than it used to be), they’d be a legit competitor to the big 2.
  • Tiger Woods will never touch Jack Nicklaus’ record for major championships. His body is showing signs of breaking down. His head has been broken down for a while. Yes, I suspect he took some PEDs during the latter portion of his glory days. No, I have no evidence beyond the circumstantial.
  • Miguel Cabrera for 10 years and how much?
  • When someone starts slamming your church out of the blue, know it isn’t out of the blue. It’s been building for a while, or something is going on outside the church that’s causing them bring their anxiety to bear on the church. Often, both.
  • Pound for pound, I think John Ortberg is my favorite preacher who is still at it today. He is a good exegete, funny, thoughtful, intelligent, and likeable. He’s also a great writer.
  • The Lakers are as far beneath the Clippers right now as the Clippers were beneath the Lakers for nearly all years previous to this one. It’s refreshing—and I bet Billy Crystal—the Clippers’ biggest fan—is beyond giddy.
  • I’m glad to see they fixed the SAT…bahahahahaha.
  • What a self-induced nightmare for World Vision. The decision was a poor for theological and pragmatic reasons. However, it wasn’t just the decision. It was how the decision was made and communicated.
  • The statement given by Richard Stearns when the decision came down seemed thin and riddled with double-speak. For instance, to say an employee cannot fornicate or commit adultery but can be a practicing homosexual, while saying the organization isn’t making judgments about rightness or wrongness on such matters–nah.
  • It’s also wasn’t wise to equate homosexuality vs. heterosexuality with sprinkling vs. immersion. It conveyed World Vision thought marriage and sexuality was just a matter of to-may-to vs. to-mah-to.
  • Increasingly, it seems some of those who do so much good work for the poor and marginalized use the poor as shields for all sorts of other agendas. Here, I’m not talking about World Vision–but others who say, in essence, “Because I do this…you can’t object to anything else I do or believe.” What a thin ethic. If it grows into manipulation through shielding oneself with the poor, it becomes a heinous ethic.
  • The caricaturing of those opposed to World Vision’s decision by the people who applauded it lacked both truth and respect. Whenever someone says, “Christians should love everyone” and then calls their Brother or Sister who disagrees with their views on biblical marriage, “a hateful bigot,” they lose whatever moral high ground they thought they had. You can’t say to your Brother, “Raca” (Mt. 5:22) and then lecture them on how they ought to love and respect others.
  • It was World Vision who put sponsored children at risk, not the sponsors–who were likely to continue to sponsor their kids. That’s part of why the decision was so poor. It felt like manipulation to the sponsors. It felt like, “We’re going to do this even though we know you hate it because you’ll never drop your kid.”
  • I sponsor three children through another organization and cherish those relationships. I entered into those relationships through their organization, in part, because of my faith in the organization. I have a lot of options for helping kids–but I chose them because I believe both in what they are doing–and them.
  • If that organization did something similar, I would likely continue to support those children–but don’t begrudge me being upset at the organization who changes it’s convictions after I enter into a cherished relationship with their organization and precious children. That relationship deserves utmost respect and care. World Vision did not demonstrate that in making its decision.
  • Having said that, most people on both sides of the ideological debate here have at least slightly less trust in World Vision. That is now their biggest problem. Trust is the currency of leadership. The reversal of their decision has bred trust on the other side, as well as Evangelicals.
  • There is much to learn in terms of leadership here. But, we’ll save that for another blog.
  • Opening Day is nearly upon us for MLB. I’ve got the Padres finishing third in the NL West, a hair out of the wild-card race. 🙁
  • In ‘N Out is the best buy in fast food–other than Taco Bell’s Beefy 5-layer burrito.

What’s on your mind this Friday? Feel free to weigh in the World Vision situation if you’d like to.