TWELVE FORMS OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

You won't believe how many forms of public transportation I used earlier this week. I had to travel to North Carolina for business, but needed to fly from New York because the person with whom I was collaborating on this assignment was from New York. So here's the rundown of modes of transportation I used to get from my house to my first stop in North Carolina:

1. Walked from my house to the subway station;
2. Took the Market-Frankford (blue) line to 30th Street Station;
3. Took the R-7 Regional Rail to Trenton;
4. Took New Jersey Transit to Penn Station in Manhattan;
5. Took the 1239 (red) line to the Times Square Station;
6. Took the NRW (yellow) line to Lex Av / 59th St Station;
7. Walked a few blocks to the Roosevelt Island Tramway station, where I took the Tram to Roosevelt Island (this part was just for fun);
8. From Roosevelt Island, took the F (orange) line to Jackson Heights / Roosevelt Avenue in Queens;
9. Took the Q33 bus to LaGuardia Airport;
10. Took a US Airways Express plane to Raleigh Durham Airport;
11. Rode the car rental shuttle bus to the car rental place; and finally
12. Drove the rental car to my first client.

Twelve forms of public transportation! Growing up in California, where the car is king and you drive everywhere, this has got to be the other end of the spectrum. God, I love riding public.

JULY 25, 2003 – AS LONG AS YOU DON’T GET CAUGHT

There are so many angles the media has taken in the Kobe Bryant case, but I want to explore one that I don’t think has yet been presented. I don’t presume to know Kobe’s motives or character, but my guess is that he is neither a paragon of virtue nor an archetype of everything wrong with today’s spoiled athlete. Maybe it’s because I’m a fan of Kobe (OK, there goes the reader’s faith in my ability to be objective), or maybe it’s because I am aware of my own sinfulness, but I’m inclined to believe that Kobe is genuinely aware that he has done something wrong, genuinely aware that he needs his wife and his God to forgive him.

These are the questions I have, to which only God and Kobe know the answers: is Kobe repentant because of the rend his infidelity has caused his wife and daughter, or because of the public and judicial consequences of his transgression? Is Kobe truly sorry for cheating on his wife, or is he mad that this fling may cost him a jail sentence, a league suspension, and an endorsement contract? Again, I’m not here to make him a saint or a sinner by insinuating that he’s one or the other; I’m honestly asking these questions without knowing the answers. The bottom line question is: does he regret committing the sin, or does he regret getting caught?

If you truly fear God, the fact that your sin is publicized and the fact that it could lead to a stained image, a loss of future riches, and a criminal record is incidental to the greater offense: offending the name and character of God. We who call ourselves Christians do a gross injustice to the glory of God when we treat our own sin in a casual and flippant manner; conversely, we give that glory its just due when we see our sin as God sees it, as an affront to His holy standard and reputation. Following this train of thought through to its logical end, I wonder: if Kobe didn’t get caught, would he be as remorseful to himself, his family, his fans, and his God?

If Kobe fears God, he should understand that this situation is ultimately not about public image or endorsement dollars or courtroom decisions; it is about his relationship with a holy God, and how his sin offends the holy nature of his God. Public humiliation, loss of endorsement power, and jail time: all of these consequences happen after the fact of the sin. They are contingent on the victim pressing charges, the media picking up the story, the jury returning with a verdict of guilty. What is on Kobe and Kobe alone is that, having committed a sin, he can choose to repent – genuinely, in his heart, and to his family and his God.

Meanwhile, in the courtroom of public opinion: the world ought to judge Kobe by its own standards. Since God is not in the picture, Kobe is simply a man whose actions should be compared against those of other men and women. In that light, he should be neither deified nor condemned. The world has decided that there is no Judge, and that you are free to do whatever you want, so long as you don’t hurt anyone and don’t get caught. So why the rush to choose sides between accusing and defending Kobe?

Our sins may or may not be as grievous as Kobe’s, but for sure they are not as public. And so we subtly but surely forget that sin is sin, whether or not we are caught, and whether or not it is broadcast to millions of Americans. In the final analysis, it doesn’t matter whether or not we’re caught, and how many intruding eyes see our sin. What matters is God’s character, and what our heart attitude will be when we realize daily that we have stained it.

BECOMING MORE CONSERVATIVE?

My wife and I were talking yesterday about an article in the paper that reports that college students are more conservative than their parents. The day before, I was discussing with a friend how successful President Bush has been in entrenching conservatism in his administration, and how much national support he seemed to be receiving for it. Both conversations made me wonder if the country was becoming more conservative, or if the country was always this conservative and the climate in the world has simply made such a conservatism less politically incorrect and therefore easier to publicly express.

In both cases, 9/11 is clearly the defining moment. If the first hypothesis were true, 9/11 changed a lot of people’s minds: screw all this openness – bad people are out to get us, so we better change our course, entrench, and take care of ourselves. If the second hypothesis were true, 9/11 cleared the air for people to be OK with their hidden jingoism: I knew this kind of stuff would happen if we weren’t careful, so now let’s be more wary and more strict.

The election of 2000 demonstrated that, at the time, we were split evenly between conservatives horrified by another four years of morally loose Democratic rule and liberals horrified that a Republican presidency would lead to tax cuts for the rich, program cuts for the poor, and a tightening of civil liberties for all. Florida’s shenanigans aside, was that vote a legitimate indicator of how our nation divided itself? Did 9/11 turn liberals into conservatives? Or did conservatives stay at home in 2000, only to come out of the woodwork once 9/11 made their xenophobic tendencies more socially acceptable?

I realize I am grossly generalizing here. Our nation doesn’t consist of two even sides, but of 280 million unique individuals, representing an impossibly complex overlap of agendas, fears, and constituencies. Still, I wonder what to make of the increasing conservatism of our country. People change their mind about things all the time. It is something I, as a proponent of open minds, hope happens. And yet I wonder who’s changed their mind in the past few years, and who’s stayed the same.

THE IMPORTANCE OF ISOLATION

In "The Making of a Leader," Bobby Clinton describes different checkpoints that God uses to develop Christian leaders. There are some obvious ones, like experimenting with one's spiritual gifts, or having your ministry responsibilities increase. One that isn't so obvious is the the role of isolation in deepening faith. Clinton describes forms of isolation (extended illness, imprisonment, time off for education) and recounts isolation experienced by Watchman Nee (who took a break from a successful ministry to start a business) and Amy Carmichael (who took a break from a successful ministry to be under the tutelage of a Christian leader).

I found that section of the book to be quite useful, given my action orientation and overall drivenness. It is good to be reminded that ministry success is based on God's moving on my life and not my moving as fast as possible, better still to be reminded that ministry to begin with is a grace received from God and not something secured by my exertion and initiative.

Sure enough, I can look back on four isolation experiences I've had, and point to lessons learned and faith matured as a result of them. I spent three months in Eastern Europe one summer, away from all my friends and family, and learned to feed myself from God's word. I spent over a year in a state of low-level depression in my early twenties, and learned that my walk with God has less to do with my grip on Him and more to do with His grip on me.

When I first got started in urban youth ministry, I made a promise to myself and the other adults with whom I worked that for the first year, I would only listen, that I would not take the initiative or contribute any ideas. I'm glad I disciplined myself to listen first and speak second; as a result, I've found sometimes that it's best not to speak at all.

And this past year, I've been away from the office, while my team runs the youth entrepreneurship program without me. As I prepare to return, I couldn't be happier with the result of this self-imposed isolation. My staff has flourished in their new responsibilities. I return with a clearer head, ready to lead by working smarter and not just harder. And everyone's excited by the reunion of the team and by the plans we've made for the upcoming program year.

Isolation is still hard for me. Like a caged football player, I want to charge out there and hit someone. God, in His infinite wisdom, sees fit to have me next to Him on the sideline: watching the play develop, seeing how skilled are my teammates, understanding His game plan and how my little piece of the work fits in. Slowly, I am learning not to be antsy, not to just count down the days and minutes until I get on the playing field; but to be still next to my Master and Lord, learning how to just be.

THE WORLD'S POLICEMAN

The message was unmistakeable, the image unforgettable: "crowds of angry Liberians dumping mutilated bodies at the embassy's front gates in a gruesome plea for help" (Philadelphia Inquirer, 7/22/03). One screams, "Tell George Bush to come now to rescue us; why are you letting us die?" Another voice in the crowd: "America, do something; is it because we have no oil?"

Corrupt leaders, rampant bloodshed, and total anarchy are par for the course in most of Africa. Liberia, having been founded by former American slaves, has closer ties to the US than most African nations; but it is merely one of many turfed by famine, civil war, and economic ruin.

Whether or not the US should (as in, has a moral obligation) or ought to (as in, it's in its best interests) be the world's policeman is not the subject of this post (although I personally think the answer to both of those questions is yes). In summarizing the bloody scene and excerpting those quotes, I merely point out that regardless of whether or not we ourselves see ourselves in that role or want to be in that role, much of the world sees us in that role.

Much of the world is under the destabilizing influence of political corruption, tribal warfare, and economic impotence. People in the US made noise about the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and then wondered why the whole world didn't feel bad for them. People in turfed countries suffer under far worse and then wonder why the US won't come to its rescue. At this point, I'm not passing any moral judgments here; just making some observations.

BEAUTIFUL FAITH HISTORIES

One of the wonderful things about the church of which I am a member is its diversity. Ethnicity, age, socio-economics, educational levels, religious backgrounds . . . there doesn't seem to be a majority or minority in any of these or other categories. And it makes for an unglamorous, motley, and quirky community. Just the kind that I think God finds beautiful.

One of the nice perks about such a diversity is the varied faith histories of our members. There is definitely no homogeneity here: our members are from around the world, from all sorts of religious (Christian and non-Christian) upbringings, deciding to follow Jesus at varied stages and stations of life.

Every so often, as a member of our leadership team I get to here some of these faith histories. The other day, we heard from three people wishing to join the church. (I've varied some of the facts below to protect privacy.) As I listened to their testimonies, I marveled at God's creativity and ability in bringing the lost back into fellowship with Him. One person came to our building because it was on the way from his apartment to his landlord's office, where he had to go monthly to pay his rent. Another shared of how 18 months in isolation overseas deepened his faith. There were stories of great sorrow: losing two children to miscarriage, growing up in a violent neighborhood, forsaking parents to follow Jesus. With every piece of these faith histories, I sensed God's tenderness and persistence in making Himself known to these brothers and sister.

I imagine that this is what heaven will be like: telling stories about God's work in us and through us. And with each story, all of our hearts will swell with love for our Savior and worship for a great and mighty God, creative and far-reaching enough to even bring us into fellowship with Him. I am glad to have had a little taste this past week of such a heavenly delight.

ANNOYING AMERICANS

One of my wife's favorite shows is Amazing Race, in which teams of two race against each other, following hints and challenges that take them all over the world. Being into travel myself, I like watching too, if only to experience vicariously the rush of learning new cultures and exploring new lands.

But lately, I've been increasingly annoyed by the contestants, who typify American travelers in my mind: loud, boorish, and whiny. One of the legs of the race last week involved catching a packed train in India. Several of the participants complained aloud about how smelly and crowded the ride was; many females thought they were being groped, and yelled at those around them not to do so or else they would physically thrown from the train.

Maybe they were getting groped, which is inexcusable in any culture. But maybe they weren't used to not having private space in a public setting. All of the American contestants -- men, women, white, black, young, old -- came off as though they owned the place, and as though they deserved better accommodations. Quit your whining; it's a rugged competition, for crying out loud!

But more irksome to me was the lack of willingness to subordinate to whatever culture they were in. To be fair, they are racing against time and each other, so maybe there's only time to be pushy and impatient. But it never seemed to occur to these Americans that they were the foreigners: that they were the ones that smelled and dressed funny, and that washing clothes in an outside pool of water was the norm, and that being packed tightly against strangers in a train is not the same thing as being groped.

Maybe I'm being too anti-American. Many of the participants marveled at the beauty and intricacy of the many cultures they were racing through. Others had their eyes opened to the poverty in which most of the world lives, and genuinely wanted to give back in some way, in a manner that did not strike me as patronizing or self-righteous. The show itself enlightens the viewer about places faraway from the US, rather than simply consuming foreign cultures and spinning them for maximum entertainment value.

Still, it irks me when Americans travel and act as if everyone around them are the ones who look out of place, backwards, and strange. By acting this way, it is they that show themselves to be those things.

DOWN TIME FOR CITY KIDS

I'm reading a book called "Reclaiming Childhood," by William Crain, which argues that our achievement-oriented society has robbed kids of their childhood. We pave over nature, quickly correct our children's mistakes, and employ rigorous standards for testing and grade promotion. Instead, we ought to give our kids time and space to explore, to dance, to learn through trial and error. A needed word, I believe, in a society that has sold its soul for tomorrow without taking the time to enjoy today.

I wonder, though, how applicable such insights are to the city kids I work with and live around. Crain does argue that they, more so than suburban and rural kids who may have easier access to nature, need to make the time to get out into wide open spaces and undeveloped settings, lest they lose the opportunity to have their bodies and souls warmed by the beauty and simplicity of nature. But he talks a lot of schools with too much focus on math and science, of parents packing their children's schedules with activities and fretting about if they're doing enough to get them ready for Harvard and Stanford. I wonder if city kids need more of this, not less.

To be sure, I too think our country's public education system is outmoded and in need of a drastic rehaul. But I believe the hyper-Montessori approach to schooling kids (there are no wrong answers, we let kids do what they want to do and not what we think they should do, schedules are determined by student interests and not by instructional sections) goes too far. Yes, let kids explore: let them not be afraid to fail, give them avenues to pursue interests, allow them to cherish the present rather than always preparing them for the future. City kids need this; but they also need structured environments, practical instruction, and scientific knowledge. We need to give them time and space to cherish their childhoods, but we do a disservice to them if we do not adequately prepare them with skills and training for future competitiveness.

Maybe I too am guilty of being too achievement-oriented. But I must say I do not totally agree that Crain's book speaks adequately to the present and future needs of the city kids I work with and live around. I do not think enjoying nature and letting kids be kids is a luxury that only the rich have room for; poor city kids deserve to have schools, neighborhoods, and parents that make such things available to them. But to swing to the other end of the pendulum, from seeing childhood as preparation for adulthood to allowing childhood to simply be the living out of childish wonder and exploration, is a dangerous sacrifice of future competitiveness by a group that can ill afford such a sacrifice.

COLLEGE PREP

Today was the first of a three-day evaluation of our after-school program. The big topic of discussion, which we've been batting back and forth for months, was whether or not we are academic (think "college prep") or enrichment (think "drop-in lab"). Even as we've evolved over time in the sophistication of our curricula and the enforcement of our policies, so as to become more academic than enrichment, our dialogue today reminded me just how far we are from truly preparing our youth to succeed in college.

I thought back to my own teen years. I was fortunate enough to live in a neighborhood whose public school was excellent; in fact, Newsweek recently ranked my alma mater in the top 100 high schools in the nation. (The honor was diminished for me, though, as our arch rivals ranked three notches above us.) Simply paying attention in class, in combination with decent and loving parents, would have adequately prepared me for life in a four-year college. I grew up in a competent and ambitious environment, and pushed myself academically and extra-curricularly, and so I was able to elevate myself to the status of Ivy League student. Did I put in the effort to get there? Partly; and partly it was luck, good parenting, and a emotionally healthy and intellectually challenging school environment.

For many of our youth, college prep would involve much more than the two or three hours of classroom training we offer them in business and entrepreneurship, more still than all the college resources, training events, and available coaching that we could possibly offer. The typical student at the high school where we draw most of our youth enters the ninth grade with a second-grade reading level . . . and graduates with a fifth-grade reading level. And don't get me started on the math skills.

The typical funder I talk to is pleased as punch with what we're doing with our students. I work myself into a religious lather expounding the power of entrepreneurship to turn students onto investing in themselves and making a category in their head for something that used to be so unattainable and unnecessary as college. And people I'm trying to sell on my program believe me. I believe me. I still do, even after today's revelations.

But I am realizing it's not so easy as that. Do we get our kids more ready for college? Yes, undoubtedly yes. Kids who were maybe on the college track are excited to take business classes and squeeze every ounce of productivity out of their university experience, because they know they need more -- knowledge, contacts, maturity -- to achieve the kind of success their entrepreneurial dreams have caused them to want. Others who never gave a second thought to higher education, stuck as they were in survival mode and poor self-esteem and negative stereotypes of inner-city kids, are all of a sudden looking into what it takes, financially and academically, to pursue a four-year degree.

But getting our kids more ready for college is not the same thing as getting them ready for college. Not to say that one program, by itself, can undo an atrocious public school education and emotional baggage and racial stigma. But it is deceitful to say that our program gets kids ready for college. It would have to do a lot more than it currently does, or even than it possibly ever could do, to do that.

MANY NATIONS, UNDER GOD

Our church celebrating the Fourth of July weekend with a morning service spiced with patriotic hymns and a reading from the Declaration of Independence. But lest we equate being Christian with being American, we were reminded that America has no special place in God's heart; it is but one of the many nations in which He longs for His name to be known and proclaimed.

Nevertheless, the Fourth of July is a distinctly American holiday, and so prayers were offered for our nation, that God would prosper us and humble us with His presence. Our pastor asked for citizens of other nations to stand and make those nations known, that we might pray such things for these nations. The following nations were represented by its citizens in our morning service: Canada, Ghana, Great Britain, Haiti, India, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Pakistan, South Africa, and Taiwan.

Though the service was in English and in an American city, it was nice to be reminded that our God is Maker and Ruler of all nations. His focus, His Word, His purposes -- they do not begin in the US and from there emanate to the ends of the earth; that is an Americentric perspective of which I have no evidence that such a perspective exists in the Bible or in the mind of God. They are truly global. Thankfully, we as a nation, and we as a congregation representing many nations, have been touched by His presence.

GAY MARRIAGES

The topic of gay marriages has been in the news a lot lately, what with Canada's decision to legally allow it. Gay rights activists in the US eagerly hope for the day the US will follow, while conservatives in this country are talking about a constitutional amendment to make sure such a thing never happens.

Like affirmative action, stem-cell research, and abortion, it's a topic I've wanted to think hard about and make a personal decision on as a Christian. And at least for now, I've decided that I'm for legally allowing gay marriages. The argument most people in favor make is that gay unions deserve the same legal recognition and benefit as heterosexual unions. Those against, however, speak mostly of the symbolism: marriage is meant to be between a man and a woman, and to allow gay marriages is to hasten the moral decline of our great country.

So I've had to wrestle with this issue from a symbolic as well as a realistic perspective. And I think what's doing it for me is that marriage is only as symbolic as the two involved choose to make it. Christians believe, for example, not only that marriage should be between a man and a woman, but that people should not have sex before marriage. To have sex with someone before marriage, according to the Christian point of view, is to become married to that person. And to get married to someone, according to the Christian point of view, is to remain married to that person, monogamous for the duration of your life together on earth.

Clearly, then, marriage in the US does not hold up to such a lofty (and I think correct) standard. Does that mean we should go about invalidating marriages left and right, or not allowing people who have slept around to get married? (We haven't even talked about marriages between two faithful Christians that eventually fall apart because of infidelity or abuse; yes, it does happen in households of faith, too.) I hardly see how this advances the cause of Christianity.

To be sure, we must uphold the sanctity of marriage, and practice it in our own unions. But let's not delude ourselves into thinking that we must impose a Christian standard of marriage on all domestic marriages. We've lost that battle long ago. The battle that we can win is to ensure that our marriages represent what we believe to be the best and truest of unions, and to respect the unions of others who think otherwise.

It should grieve us that people sleep around, and that marriage is held in so relatively low regard that it comes in the middle of a relationship that has become sexually intimate rather than at the beginning. But our solution, symbolically and realistically, ought not to be to make such marriages illegal. Rather, it should be to guard our own sinful hearts against such transgressions, to live lives of satisfaction and joy in respecting what is true about marriage and sexuality, and allowing those who disagree with us to share some of that satisfaction and joy that they might desire to have more. And so I think it ought to be with gay marriages.

Feel free to disagree, whether you are Christian or not. I am open to being convinced, to changing my mind, and open most of all to knowing and living in what is most truthful and most honoring to our Maker and Lord.

WHAT I REMEMBER ABOUT THE TITANS

I watched the movie, "Remember the Titans," last week. It was the quintessential Disney flick: I laughed, I cried, and I made gagging sounds. Oh sure, it is an inspirational storyline: black coach wins over a skeptical and bigoted community, unites his black and white players, and captures the state championship on a last-second touchdown.

In the lead role, Denzel Washington is mighty compelling as Coach Boone. But I am left wondering if the moral of the story is that winning covers over a multitude of sins: the former coach turned assistant, the white All-Americans, and even the prejudiced white girlfriend of one of the players are won over to Boone because the team is winning. Hey, everybody loves a champion.

Is this our best hope for racial progress? To be sure, white and black working together does make for a better team, whether it is on the football field, in an urban congregation, or in the corporate boardroom. But what about the noble people who seek harmony and understanding, and get a 7-4 season for it, or a moderately successfully church, or a barely profitable small business? If such efforts to cross and respect cultures don't lead to undefeated seasons or explosive church growth or trendy technological innovation, will they galvanize the kind of momentum and feel-good spirit our fictional Titans were able to manufacture?

We saw how much the general public harpooned the New York Times over the Jayson Blair incident. (I wonder who in the movie would've jumped off the "feel-good bandwagon" if the Titans had lost a game.) Race-related initiatives must be judged by their inherit rightness, not by their short-term results. I personally support affirmative action not just because of the positive and productive benefits it accrues to campuses and companies, but also because racial discrimination did exist and does exist, and must be countered.

The recent split decision by the Supreme Court represents for me a victory of sorts. But I cringe at the thought that most Americans are conditioned to think about race as it is presented in movies like "Remember the Titans." Support racially enlightened policy and relations to the extent that leads to winning. Abandon such efforts the second it stops inspiring or benefiting me. Get off the team's bandwagon the second it starts losing. Is this what we have to look forward to the minute something bad related to affirmative action happens?

IS THIS AN ELECTION OR A REALITY TV SHOW?

Well, I signed up to help a colleague of mine win a City Council seat in order to get introduced to city politics, and it's been quite an education so far. The mayoral campaign will probably be like the one in 1999: issues-oriented, heated, and close. From what I'm hearing so far, though, the City Council election is less about urban issues and more about smoky-room deals.

Here's how it works: during the primaries in May, registered party voters pick five people from all the candidates in their party. This narrows things down to five D's and five R's. Come November, all voters will pick five candidates from any party, and the top seven (five D's and two R's, in the case of Philadelphia) are in.

So, not unlike Survivor and other reality-based TV shows, contestants -- whoops, excuse me, candidates -- do well to form alliances. For example, on the Republican side, there are two well-known candidates and three dark horses. The front-runners gain nothing if their fan base votes straight Republican; since only two Republicans get in, they need to get more votes than their fellow Republicans. So what they'll usually do is cut a deal with someone on the Democrat side whereby they'll tell their fan base to vote for them, maybe one or two of the dark horse Republican candidates, and then one or two of the Democrats. In return, the Democrat(s) who are getting those votes do the same thing on their side. Kinda sneaky, eh?

I knew I should've paid more attention during Survivor: I could've learned everything I needed to know in order to win a City Council election.