Dialectic

One of my stu­dents (stage name Dialec­tic) just released a rap album. You can pre­view it at MySpace. Or as we hip-hop­pers like to call it, MySchiz­zle.

How Not To Be Holy

I just read a great lit­tle med­i­ta­tion on holi­ness called Whack-a-mole and Sin Man­age­ment in Lead­er­ship Jour­nal. When I checked to see if it was online I dis­cov­ered that the author has a blog.

Staff Reading Cohort

Our staff team is going to begin a read­ing pro­gram togeth­er. We’re pick­ing our books now, and I thought some of you might be inter­est­ed in the guide­lines we’re using. I sort of made these up and mod­i­fied them based on the feed­back I received.

Fre­quen­cy
Let’s start off with a book every two months. This will give us plen­ty of time to pur­sue our own read­ing with­out short­chang­ing our staff reads. We can always adjust the time lat­er if we need to.

Selec­tion
We make our list up two full cycles in advance (one whole year). We each get to pro­pose 4 books, and then we each rank the result­ing list of 12. We tal­ly the votes using an inter­net script (Con­dorcet method for any vot­ing geeks out there). The top six books win. We’ll decide the order in which the win­ners will be read infor­mal­ly, try­ing to alter­nate old­er books with new­er books.

Guide­lines

  1. We have to pro­pose books that we have not read yet. Don’t pick some­thing you loved and think it will be good for every­one else. The point of this exer­cise is per­son­al growth.
  2. Hav­ing said that, it’s okay if some­one else pro­pos­es a book that you have already read and the team selects it. In that case, you don’t have to reread it–skimming will do.
  3. Don’t try to impress any­one. No need to pick aca­d­e­m­ic phi­los­o­phy or any­thing like that–unless you real­ly want to read it.
  4. Let’s try to alter­nate between new books and books old­er than we are. This isn’t a rigid rule, but an aspi­ra­tion.
  5. Fresh­ness is good when we’re talk­ing about some­thing based on research, and age is good when we’re talk­ing about some­thing based on reflec­tion. If you want us to think about sci­ence or cul­ture get a new book. If you want us to think about God or life get an old­er book. Unless you real­ly don’t want to–these are guide­lines and not rules. 😉
  6. The books can be about any­thing, but let’s keep fic­tion to a min­i­mum.
  7. Noth­ing over 500 pages with­out first clear­ing it with every­one else.
  8. Noth­ing over $30 with­out clear­ing it first with every­one else.
  9. If you want, you can pro­pose mul­ti­ple short books as a sin­gle rec­om­men­da­tion (less than 200 pages total).

After Read­ing
Fol­low­ing the read­ing of the book, by a spec­i­fied dead­line, the choos­er will com­pose a few (3–5) ques­tions for group dis­cus­sion either in per­son, over the phone or online.

Any­way, it’s not too ele­gant but it looks as though it will serve us well. We’ve each made our sug­ges­tions and here’s the list we’re going to be vot­ing on:

  • The Nico­machean Ethics by Aris­to­tle
  • Prayer by George But­trick
  • Good to Great and the Social Sec­tors: A Mono­graph to Accom­pa­ny Good to Great by Jim Collins
  • Col­lege of the Over­whelmed: The Cam­pus Men­tal Health Cri­sis and What to Do About It by Richard D. Kadi­son and There­sa Foy DiGeron­i­mo
  • The Five Dys­func­tions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni
  • Cre­ative Min­istry by Hen­ri Nouwen
  • In the Name of Jesus by Hen­ri Nouwen
  • Pensees by Blaise Pas­cal
  • Eat This Book: A Con­ver­sa­tion in the Art of Spir­i­tu­al Read­ing by Eugene Peter­son
  • Spur­geon’s Lec­tures to My Stu­dents by Charles Spur­geon
  • The Oth­er Six Days: Voca­tion, Work, and Min­istry in Bib­li­cal Per­spec­tive by R. Paul Stevens
  • Mar­gin by Richard Swen­son

Once we have the results I’ll let you know what we wind up read­ing.

Ringing The Church Bells Via SMS

We’re putting togeth­er a text-mes­sag­ing reminder ser­vice for our meet­ings. Every Wednes­day night at 7pm our web­site will send out a SMS mes­sage to the cell phones of every­one who signs up remind­ing them to get ready for Chi Alpha’s week­ly wor­ship meet­ing. It’s a sim­ple mes­sage to help out those stu­dents who always mean to come but get busy doing some­thing else and for­get until the meet­ing is part­way over:

Chi Alpha at 8:00 tonight in 300–300.

I’ve just test­ed the sys­tem and it works pret­ty smooth­ly. It’s the mod­ern-day equiv­a­lent of ring­ing the church bells!

The script was real­ly sim­ple to write. If you use a unix-based sys­tem with PHP & PEAR installed you could eas­i­ly adapt it for your min­istry:

#!/usr/bin/php
 ?php
//sends SMS announcments to each person in Chi Alpha who wants them

require_once('Mail.php');
$parameters['sendmail_args']='';
$mailer=&Mail::factory('sendmail',$parameters);

$cells['Ferdinand Frosh']='5555555555';
$cells['Suzie Sophomore']='5555555555';
$cells['Jing Junior']='5555555555';
$cells['Sheila Senior']='5555555555';

$headers['From']='you@example.com';
$headers['Reply-To']='you@example.com';
$headers['Subject']='XA @ 8pm';
$body='Chi Alpha at 8:00 tonight in 300-300';

foreach ($cells as $cell) {
        if (empty($cell)) continue;
        $email=$cell.'@teleflip.com';
        //echo $email;
        $mailer->send($email,$headers,$body);
}
?>

All you have to do is cus­tomize the script (add cell phone num­bers and the right “From” and “Reply-To” emails) and then add it to your crontab file with an entry like so:

0 19 * * 4 /path/to/announce.php

(Hint: type crontab ‑e to edit your crontab file).

By the way, it should go with­out say­ing that you nev­er add some­one to an SMS announce­ment sys­tem with­out their express per­mis­sion! If you think email spam hacks peo­ple off, then just wait until some­one has to pay a text-mes­sag­ing fee for some­thing they’re not inter­est­ed in. The depths of their rage would aston­ish the Hulk.

Geek­s­peak: the rea­son I used the PEAR::Mail library was to make sure that the reply-to address was the one I want­ed. I just could­n’t make it hap­pen using the PHP mail() func­tion alone. Every­thing was from “root@my web­serv­er.” Very annoy­ing.

Hymnody

I sent this email to our wor­ship lead­ers and I thought oth­ers might be inter­est­ed in it.

Why do we try to incor­po­rate a hymn each week into wor­ship?

The short­est answer I can give is to quote C. S. Lewis on old books: “Every age has its own out­look. It is spe­cial­ly good at see­ing cer­tain truths and spe­cial­ly liable to make cer­tain mis­takes. We all, there­fore, need the books that will cor­rect the char­ac­ter­is­tic mis­takes of our own peri­od. And that means the old books. All con­tem­po­rary writ­ers share to some extent the con­tem­po­rary outlook–even those, like myself, who seem most opposed to it. None of us can escape this blind­ness, but we shall cer­tain­ly increase it, and weak­en our guard against it, if we read only mod­ern books. The only pal­lia­tive is to keep the clean sea breeze of the cen­turies blow­ing through our minds, and this can be done only by read­ing old books. Not, of course, that there is any mag­ic about the past. Peo­ple were no clev­er­er then than they are now; they made as many mis­takes as we. But not the same mis­takes.” (from his intro­duc­tion to Athana­sius’ On The Incar­na­tion).

The same thing is true of songs. There are some great wor­ship songs out today and I want the major­i­ty of our wor­ship to fea­ture them. But I don’t want us to just fea­ture them. They have notable weak­ness­es (pdf link) and so I want the “sea breeze of the cen­turies” to blow through our wor­ship and keep us root­ed.

Hav­ing said that, tra­di­tion­al hymn music does­n’t real­ly con­nect with today’s stu­dents. That’s why I urge you to seek out or make up (yes, you are allowed to do that) con­tem­po­rary arrange­ments for the hymns that we do sing.

I’ve found a few that illus­trate what I’m talk­ing about. Check out http://igracemusic.com/igracemusic/hymnbook/hymns.html

Each one has a sam­ple mp3, lead sheets, tab sheets, and oth­er resources avail­able for wor­ship teams.

Anoth­er excel­lent exam­ple is the Dave Crow­der band’s record­ing of “All Crea­tures Of Our God And King.”

Any­way, I’ve been mean­ing to explain myself on that for a while but I’ve nev­er actu­al­ly got­ten around to it.

So there.

Encyclopedia Smackdown

In yet anoth­er vin­di­ca­tion of Wikipedia, the pres­ti­gious sci­ence jour­nal Nature just released a fas­ci­nat­ing arti­cle, Inter­net ency­clopae­dias go head to head which did some thor­ough research and dis­cov­ered that at least in sci­ence, Wikipedia is on par with the Ency­clo­pe­dia Bri­tan­ni­ca for accu­ra­cy (if not ele­gance). Dis­claimer: I’m a proud Wikipedi­an (user­name Glen­Davis)

Personality Tests And Their Defects

The Cult of Personality Testing : How Personality Tests Are Leading Us to Miseducate Our Children, Mismanage Our Companies, and Misunderstand OurselvesSome­time last year I read The Cult of Per­son­al­i­ty (since reti­tled to The Cult of Per­son­al­i­ty Test­ing). I picked it up on a whim at an off­beat book­store in Half Moon Bay between two church ser­vices.

I loved it and found it utter­ly per­sua­sive. I’ve had a long-sim­mer­ing aver­sion to per­son­al­i­ty test­ing (root­ed in a bad expe­ri­ence in sem­i­nary, observ­ing friends get shaft­ed by the Assem­blies of God per­son­al­i­ty screen­ing sys­tem for mis­sion­ar­ies, some bit­ing pas­sages about psy­chol­o­gy by Richard Feyn­mann, and being a crit­i­cal thinker). Some­thing about them always felt wrong (and I could even put parts of my unease into fair­ly per­sua­sive words), but I nev­er had the facts I need­ed to under­stand exact­ly where the prob­lem lay. This book changed all that.

I men­tion it because I just read an arti­cle by Mal­colm Glad­well called Per­son­al­i­ty Plus that cov­ers the same ground. It’s a great intro to the con­cepts cov­ered in the book.

So if you’re in the habit of refer­ring to peo­ple by their Myers-Brig­gs type, or if you like to use the terms san­guine and cho­ler­ic in casu­al con­ver­sa­tion, or if you’ve ever made a deci­sion based on the results of a per­son­al­i­ty test, READ THIS BOOK (or at least Glad­well’s arti­cle).

Is Stanford Worth It?

Our team­mate Lind­sey found a great arti­cle about the return-on-invest­ment of elite schools like Stan­ford.

Lion Rampant

My church went to see The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe this Sat­ur­day and we brought guests–3 to 4 times as many out­side our church went to see it with us as did church mem­bers.

It was mag­nif­i­cent. From a fan’s per­spec­tive, it was as faith­ful to the book as you can expect a movie to be. From a tech­ni­cal per­spec­tive, it should say some­thing that I found a beaver in chain mail utter­ly con­vinc­ing.

They even made Turk­ish Delight look appeal­ing, which is tru­ly nasty can­dy. If that was the most tempt­ing snack avail­able to Brits dur­ing the war I’m amazed they were able to hold out against the Luft­waffe. I mean, real­ly. Turk­ish Delight? The stuff tastes like con­gealed fat.

I was des­tined to love the movie as long as it was even close to the book. I was more inter­est­ed in the reac­tions of my neigh­bors: he an athe­is­tic Jew­ish post­doc­tor­al biol­o­gy researcher at Stan­ford and she a not-real­ly-prac­tic­ing Hin­du who works as a busi­ness con­sul­tant.

They loved it, too.

As we were talk­ing about it after­wards, he com­ment­ed “The reviews I’ve read are right–it’s def­i­nite­ly got Chris­t­ian imagery but you have to look for it.”

While I think he down­played the obvi­ous­ness of the Chris­t­ian mes­sage (it’s always win­ter with­out CHRISTmas–hello?), I think he was on to some­thing.

The movie did dilute some key dia­log, but even if the dia­log had been unal­tered his point would still have mer­it. The sto­ry does­n’t so much tell the Chris­t­ian mes­sage as it pre­pares one for it. It cre­ates cat­e­gories and under­stand­ings in your mind which serve as place­hold­ers for the gospel. It’s like an extend­ed para­ble that high­lights a few truths:

  • This world is more fan­tas­tic than we dare believe.
  • Evil is seduc­tive.
  • Evil need not pre­vail, either in our lives or in our world.
  • Evil must be fought.
  • We can’t win the fight against evil alone.
  • The one we need help from is our right­ful King.
  • Our right­ful King is not tame but he is good.

And giv­en Phillp Pull­man’s claim that the sto­ry was love­less I couldn’t help but mar­vel as the for­mer­ly fear-strick­en Edmund—Edmund, who knew well the hor­ri­ble extent of the Witch’s power—hurled him­self at her to pre­vent the slaugh­ter of Peter and incurred a life-threat­en­ing wound as a result. And I could talk of the love of the moth­er for her chil­dren, of the chil­dren for their father, of the chil­dren for each oth­er, of the chil­dren for Aslan, of Aslan for his peo­ple, of the pro­fes­sor for his hap­less­ly unlove­able house­keep­er, and of the chil­dren (espe­cial­ly Lucy) for Mr. Tum­nus.

No love indeed. Pull­man just has it in for Lewis.

Any­way, it’s an out­stand­ing movie. I’ve been to pre­cious few movies which caused the audi­ence to burst into applause at the end. This was one.

That Never Occurred To Me

As I was doing some read­ing in the Dic­tio­nary of the Old Tes­ta­ment: Pen­ta­teuch, a thought jumped out at me in the arti­cle Fam­i­ly Rela­tion­ships: ston­ing is a unique form of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment because it requires the entire com­mu­ni­ty to accept the respon­si­bil­i­ty for putting some­one to death and it pre­vents any one per­son from hav­ing to serve as the exe­cu­tion­er. It’s like a fir­ing squad that way. I won­der how the debate on the death penal­ty woud change if we each had to help exe­cute con­victs…