ICE

Recently, Heather and I went downtown to see the newly made ice sculptures in the 2011 Crystal Gallery of Ice.

Sculptors had three days to design and and carve their creations. We looked around on Sunday just a few hours before their deadline, so the carvings were pretty much complete.

Enjoy the pics.

So

many of the sculptures were totally cool...

...and huge!

The detail was amazing.

Speaking of huge

Amends

In December I wrote a blog post entitled, "Moving: The Saga," in which I told of my experience making a cross-country move with the help of a reputable moving company. You can read the original post by clicking here.

As we had experienced a certain amount of frustration during the moving process, I admit that my post is, to some degree, a rant. If you're reading this, you likely read the original post, and you probably noticed me complaining about dealing with the moving company, complaining about the bills we were receiving, and complaining about when our stuff arrived.

The average person reading that post would probably say, "Ugh, that would've been frustrating." However, if you are the moving company you would've been offended to read my words, which were at times aggressive.

It just so happens that someone from the moving company stumbled across my blog and read my post about them. She responded rather energetically in kind by setting up her own blog in response to my mine. And her comments have certainly given me much on which to ponder. Soon, you will be able to read her response by clicking here. (I will activate this link as soon as the author grants me a request, seen below, regarding confidentiality.)

In the response she is clarifying, from her perspective, some of the events I griped about. Isn't that just it, perspective? I wrote about my experience from my perspective, and she wrote from her own. My words were fueled by frustration, and even though I was harsh, I still hold that I was writing from my experience with this moving company. That should give them something to think about.

(*Note: My above use of italics is not to make those italicized words louder but rather to emphasize the point I am trying to make, which is this: my blog post was the result of my experience with this company. All good businesses will welcome input from their customers as a means to better serve customers in the future and prosper as a company. No doubt this moving company is a good business and will use well this input. Hence, they have something to think about.)

In all frankness, I slung mud at them. Yes, me. (Shocked? Me too, because I'm the least confrontational person out there.) In return, mud was lobbed back my way (some directed at my integrity as a minister, which hurt a little). But also, reading her response, it's evident there's lots of emotion and feelings of being wronged. And as I did not want to "wrong" anyone, that certainly gives me something to think about.

Now, I suppose we could go back and forth slinging mud and arguing details till we're blue in the keyboard. She read my blog and perceived errors which she wanted to correct. There are also errors in her response, which I'm tempted to re-correct. However, this cycle would likely never end. And, where would it get us? Only more disconnected, more angry, more feelings of betrayal, hatred, judgement and of being judged. That is not a road I want to travel. We've all been there at some point or another, we know its a place of pain. I would just as soon not start down it. So, for now I will temper my urge to re-correct certain details addressed in her response.

In the response, she wrote that she tries her best to conduct business and live by the Golden Rule. And I can tell you, as I dealt with her during our move I can affirm that statement. N was the bright spot in my experience, the "ray of warm sunshine," as I originally wrote.

So, readers, where do we go from here? How do we best resolve conflict? I will tarry on the mud-slinging option in hopes that the other side will do the same. I would like to search for a place of reconciliation, a place to make amends, in hopes that the other side will do the same. However, I'll confess, it's not always easy to know how to do that. I suppose I could fold, admit outright that I was off my rocker, take back everything, delete the blog post, apologize profusely and request forgiveness for my words, all the while completely denying and discrediting my own feelings which produced the original comments. That approach would be inauthentic.

I could demand that they see things my way, make a list of all the facts as I see them, insist my list is inerrant, and wait firm fisted until they either ignore me or give in. But, I don't see that working either. Both of these approaches creates a winner and a loser, which I perceive to be a loss for both parties.

A month or more removed from "The Saga," I can think a bit more objectively about the situation. I called this moving company a "scammer" company. Here in January, I am willing to take that strong accusation back; however, I cannot take back the fact that we felt as if we were being scammed.

The truth is, I believe if I had been told some of the things that N has revealed about my move in her response, it may have considerably changed and positively inclined my feelings toward the whole thing. Yet, often times I felt left in the dark by the company, and this generated feelings of angst which grew into hostility. So, communication between us needed to be clearer.

Let me ask you this: What have you done in the past to respond and resolve conflict? What is your advice to me now? What is your advice to the other party?

While I still do not see clearly the road to take for how best to make amends, here is a start:

N,

During my move I had a considerable amount of frustration and negative emotion toward your company. Please accept my apology for posting these feelings on the internet instead of coming to you directly. The result could also be named as slander, and for that I apologize.

I yearn for reconciliation as I believe it to be the most life giving resolution to conflict.

What's done is done, and I cannot take back what people have already read on my original post. However, as a step toward making amends I have removed all names of people and companies from my original post. Please accept this as a step toward reconciliation. I would ask in return that you remove specific invoice amounts from your response blog as they are closely related to my own personal finances and something I prefer to be kept private. I trust you will graciously and promptly honor this request for confidentiality.

I realize that reading my blog has put you on the defensive. For me, reading your response has done the same. My wish is to lower my own defensiveness making myself vulnerable in hopes that you may be able to do the same, so that we might talk to one another openly and genuinely to find resolution.

Sincerely,

Nathan

Readers, I invite your input. Is this a step in the right direction?

Comments?

Alyeska

This past week Heather and I have twice ventured south yonder to Alyeska Ski Mountain, which is in Girdwood, about an hour drive from our apartment.

Heather took up skiing after we met as I have grown up in the sport. Already, it has become something we love going and doing together. Upon invitation by one of the pharmacists she works with, Heather joined a ski class that meets each Wednesday during the month of January. For a quite reasonable price, they offer class members three hours with an instructor, rentals, a lift ticket and lunch. Heather's spaghetti was far better than my smooshed ham sandwich.

We went this past Saturday, just to ski for they day, check out the mountain, and get our skiing feet back before she began the class. It was a poor choice. The half-day pass (which we got) was only $5 less than a full-day, the very top of the mountain was closed, and it was raining (high on the mountain it was snow). Rain makes the snow very slushy and hard to turn in. It also makes your clothes wet. Because of the heavy snow, Heather fell three times, one of which was a glorious yard sale (losing poles and skies) worthy of being applauded from those on the nearby chair lift. By the end we were soaked through every layer. We were ready to leave before quitting time having learned the lesson that skiing in the rain is not for us.

Luckily, Wednesday was a beautiful day. Skiing conditions were perfect as the night before clouds had dropped 14 inches of fresh powder on the mountain. In the middle of the week, there were few people there so no lift lines or crowded slopes. The temp was in the twenties and the air crisp. A perfect skiing day.

The ski mountain sits in a bowl a few miles wide. The chair lift takes you above the tree line where there's nothing but open skiable area. There's few sectioned off trails up there, but mostly just hillside ripe for the adventurous. Anywhere you can get to, you can ski down.

So, from 10:30 to 1:30pm, Heather skied with her class, and I moseyed off to explore what over of foot of fresh powder is like. And it's great! However, it does require a little getting used to as usually your feet and skies are totally covered up. At one point, while going down a double-black diamond, the powder was so thick I was buried literally up to my knees, and my poles were no use because they just sink when you try to plant them into sturdy ground. After that run (like the previous rainy day) my inner-most layer was soaked, but not because wet snow or water had gotten in but because I was sweating so hard.

After lunch we met up, and Heather told me all about how great her class was. She has a very solid instructor who gave her tips I never could. She learned to ski from me and my family, but there's some things that it takes a professional to teach. Immediately, on our first run down, I could tell she'd improved. Her form was solid and she had more confidence. Heather didn't fall all day, and she even reminded me about a few points on how to ski better.

I hope the pictures do most of the talking in this post. The views, obviously, were gorgeous, and the pics don't even show it all. Heather's got three more Wednesdays to ski and learn. I'll be working those days, but hopefully, the next time we get to go together she'll be hopping like a pro past me while I get back up, fetch my poles and put my skies back on. (Yeah right, like I would ever fall!)

Was Jesus A Christian?

I've been thinking lately about something. I've read in a number of books, heard in sermons, and one can even tell by carefully reading the New Testament, that Jesus did not intent to start a new religion.

This is a nice point to make in a sermon and quickly pass by knowing you've left a quaint smile on the faces of those listening but not processing. However, the more I think about this seemingly small notion, the less small it becomes.

In a lengthy theological correspondence, my sister and I have tossed this question back and forth a time or two, but never really landed anywhere solid.

Technically, of course Jesus was not a Christian, for the word itself means, "little Christ," and one of the chief marks of Christian belief is holding that Jesus was in fact a big Christ. The word "Christ" comes from the Greek for "anointed one" meaning traditionally the one who is set for the task of rescuing Israel. The Hebrew word for Christ is "Messiah."

Jesus was a Jew, a good Jew, who followed all, really most, of the rules. He never renounced his Jewishness, and he never told non-Jews that they needed to become Jewish. He never told Jews that they needed to become something else. In fact, as you follow Jesus around Palestine in the canonical gospels you start to notice that he didn't seem to be recruiting converts at all. If anything, you might say he was inspiring righteousness. He did recruit 12 followers, or disciples, and he had lots of other folks following him around. But, isn't it strange that we never find Jesus promoting the new fad and lining people up to take their name and count them part of his new movement?

The first public announcement Jesus makes is this: "The time has come....The Kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news" (Mark 1:15 NIV). This does not sound like a call for folks to get in the Christianity line.

In his hometown synagogue, Jesus read these lines from Isaiah: "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor" (Luke 8:18-19). And in John 10:10 Jesus says about people in general, "I came that they may have life and have it abundantly" (ESV). These are not calls for recruitment. They are statements of purpose.

In fact, nowhere in the New Testament can I find Jesus saying, "Line up behind me, everyone!" In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus did lots of teaching on how to live a moral life; however, none of that teaching seems to be the rules and guidelines for a new religion.

Even when Paul was trying to help sort out how Jews and non-Jews could live, worship and commune together, he never told one group that they had to assimilate and become another group. He advocated that Jews remain Jews and follow Jewish custom as long as they don't force it on non-Jews. And vice-versa.

I wonder, if followers of Islam had been around at that time what would Paul have written to them. Strangely, I'm suspicious that he would've said the same kind of thing as he said to the Jews.

This is a quandary for me. Jesus was not out to start a new club; however, after his death, the 12 disciples did just that. Is that what Jesus wanted? Is this what he'd planned all along, but not said anything about? What do we do with the fact that the new group started in Acts 2 was religiously pluralistic? It had people of many different faiths, a radically inclusive group. Yet today, 99% of the Christians out there are highly exclusive when it comes to different religions/faiths.

Now, I already know how most conservative Christians will respond to these questions. However, if these comments have pricked anything in your mind, please comment. I'd love to hear your thoughts or discussion points.

What do you think? Was Jesus a Christian? Would he be one if he was alive today?

A New Kind of Christianity, by Brian McLaren

When I saw that this book had such sharp reviews from opposing sides of the opinion spectrum, it caught my attention. So, after opening up a Barnes & Noble Nook for Christmas, the first book I downloaded onto it was Brian McLaren's latest book, A New Kind of Christianity: Ten Questions that are Transforming the Faith.

To start off, I might offer a warning about this book to the theologically mild mannered out there. My own theology has certainly been a place of journeying, reconsidering, questioning, and quite frankly honest struggle. And this book ain't making that business any easier.

Mr. McLaren's basic thesis is that our society is on the verge of another shift in thought and theolgy similar to the Enlightenment or the Protestant Reformation. As post-modernity moves into full swing it is becoming more evident that older schools of thought and theology are having more trouble addressing today's questions. McLaren's prescription: not a different way of seeing our usual faith or belief system, and not an alternate approach to "doing" church or programs, but very much a radical New Kind of Christianity.

McLaren takes issue with modern Christianity's basic approach to reading and interpreting the Bible. He submits that we read scripture backwards, through the lens of Martin Luther, who reads through the lens of the Roman Catholic tradition which reads through Augustine who in turn reads through the eyes of the patristic church fathers and so on all the way back to Antiquity. Instead, McLaren offers that we should reconsider reading the Bible forward, starting from Genesis, moving on to Exodus, through Isaiah and culminating in the person of Jesus. What I mean by this is, What did Abraham believe about God? How did Moses understand the Divine? What was Isaiah prophesying about concerning God's shalom? And how did Jesus fulfill those prophesies ushering in the the Kingdom of God?

You might be thinking, "Well, my church already reads the Bible forwards." And I apologize for my poor attempt at summarizing McLaren's thesis, but, chances are, actually you don't. Rather, like me, you probably read the Bible through what McLaren calls the Greco-Roman narrative. (Sadly, there's not space or time to fully describe this narrative and it's ramifications.) This is the understanding of scripture that took a tight hold and hasn't let go when Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire (the same empire that executed Jesus) under Emperor Constantine. Though he didn't say it in these words, McLaren fears that when that shift took place, the essential message of the gospel changed.

The Greco-Roman narrative of Christianity is highly influenced by a Platonic (Plato) view of the world, which says that spiritual things or the unseen parts of the universe are the better, the perfect parts of existence and the material, fleshy, human worldly portions of existence are less, fallen, dirty, changing. Plato's gods existed in the spiritual, the perfect, never-changing realm and we, because things change and evolve in our world, live on the wrong side of the Platonic tracks.

What does all this mean? McLaren thinks it means that the Greco-Roman narrative of perfection, fall, and either redemption or hell forever, is a result of a theology not held by Jews at the time of Jesus. Rather, the good news that Jesus was proclaiming and fulfilling was that prophesied by Isaiah when he preached on a coming era of reconciliation, jubilee, peace, community, and all that lions laying down with lambs mess. a.k.a God's shalom.

Now, depending on your theological acuity you may or may not be hearing the gravity of what McLaren is up to in my limited and honestly poor description. To put it bluntly, McLaren is proposing an understanding of Christianity with a different gospel that most conservative and even not so conservative folks out there. And the reason for this is the influence that the Greco-Roman narrative has had on Christianity for the last 1,600 years.

Now, there's sooo much more in this book that what I've said. Again, it's a book of questions. His topics are God, Jesus, the gospel, church, sex (particularly homosexuality), the future, pluralism (what do we do with other religions) and praxis. However, each topic is approached through a non-Greco-Roman orthodox. And what he comes out with is, if nothing else, extremely thought provoking.

Some of you reading even just my simple review will have immediate strong feelings toward what McLaren is doing. I, myself, am reserving judgment as I need much time to chew on it. There's no doubt McLaren, a pastor for 20 some years, loves God and cares for the church deeply. That no doubt will make it difficult as he has already been branded a heretic by loads of conservatives and fundamentalists. But, honestly, even if you agree with those who condemn his approach, I believe it does no good to simply lambaste him judgmentally and move on. Rather, I'd invite you to perhaps read for yourself and engage what he's saying.

The questions he's asking in this book are not going away, so whatever your response to them or to McLaren, you'd be wise to grapple with them yourself.

As for the technical. McLaren is a gifted writer with a powerful vocabulary. There were times when it took all of my seminary degree just to keep up. He declares at the beginning that his comments on the ten questions of the book are responses, not answers. They will generate discussion, no doubt. I have to give the book the ever coveted Nathan's-two-thumbs-up award. Whether I'm all aboard the B. McLaren express or not, I have to give him credit. I believe he's honestly trying to work for the good, and bravely taking lots of criticism in the process.

Who Moved My Cheese, by Spencer Johnson

My dear sister gave me this book after I mentioned wanting to read it while visiting her Raleigh home two weeks ago. Who Moved My Cheese: An A-Mazing Way to Deal with Change in Your Work and in You Life is a short book with a tall order inside. I knew I wanted to read it after hearing it recommended by two people whose opinions on good books I respect.

Physician Spencer Johnson tells a little story about two mice named Sniff and Scurry and two small (mouse-size) humans named Hem and Haw. I'll paraphrase it here. Our four characters find themselves ready to take on life. So, they set out in the maze of life in search of cheese (representative, of course, of whatever it is we're after in life). After a great deal of hard work, Sniff Scurry, Hem and Haw find an abundance of Cheese at Cheese Station C. All is well.

Hem and Haw hand up their work shoes and build luxury homes with privacy fences next to the cheese station and get comfortable and complacent. Until, one day, there is no more cheese at Cheese Station C. That very day, Sniff and Scurry put back on their work shoes and venture out again in search of more cheese. They soon find it. What do Hem and Haw do? Well, they hem and haw for a while about being entitled and feeling victimized. Eventually, Haw musters up some motivation, dusts off his old shoes, and sets out back into the now unfamiliar maze. Hem stays behind, blathering and slowly withering.

After some time of wandering and finding small bits of cheese to last him, Haw finally, finally reaches the bountiful cheese storehouse of Cheese Station N. Sniff and Scurry are already there, and sadly Hem will never choose to leave Station C.

Johnson does a good job at making this little story delightful and obviously parallel to life's changes. The last pages of the book are a verbatim account of a helpful discussion group on the book. Various people in the group identify with the different characters' responses when the cheese is moved. It's a good little book that I'd recommend as a quick read with long-term lessons.

After finishing it, I noticed myself more motivated to adapt to the big changes in life when one day they come calling on me. Then I realized, "oh crap! I'm slap in the middle of a huge life change! I've just moved to the other side of the North American Continent to a place where my specific denomination (CBF) isn't even present, where there's no open jobs for full-time chaplains and we don't have any friends or contacts. Where did my cheese go?

So, how am I going to adapt? Well, I've got my work shoes on, and I'm heading out into the maze. I'm calling pastors and chaplains, setting up lunch meetings to talk about ministry opportunities in Anchorage. I've gotten a tour of the largest hospital in the area, and attended a meeting of volunteer chaplains for the police and firemen in the area. I've given out my resume to two HR folks so far. I'm in the maze.

And what is the outcome so far? Well, I don't know if it is a busting full cheese station or not; however, I have accepted an offer to come on as (once again) a resident chaplain at Providence Medical Center (the big hospital) for the next eight months. In that time I will complete two more units of CPE giving me a total of seven. This is in line with one of my long-term goals of becoming a CPE supervisor, and for now it is a paying job during which I will no doubt learn and blog a lot.

Who Moved My Cheese? I don't know, but I'm working on finding it.

Five Hundred

I'm reminded of that game I used to play as a kid. One person would throw a football high into the air toward a group of others trying to catch it. The thrower would yell out a number as s/he threw, and the one who caught the ball would get that many points. The first to reach 500 wins and gets to be the next ball thrower.

Today's the day folks. The day of 500. Today, Heather metaphorically caught the ball.

To become a pharmacist in North Carolina one has to jump through a great deal of hoops including but not limited to strong grades in tough undergrad courses, standardized tests strictly for the pharmacy profession, admission into a pharmacy school which leads to 4 grueling years of hard work with little recompense or satisfaction.

The fourth year of pharm-school is entirely hands on. One of the chief reasons for this is that the governing bodies require students to gain 1500 hours of supervised practice experience before they can take two more tests and be granted a license. Just to be on the safe side, the pharmacy school at UNC-CH arranges for their students to earn 1600 total practice hours before graduating so that they're well prepared to represent the pedigree on their diploma.

The state of North Carolina houses three separate pharmacy schools including UNC, the #2 ranked pharm-school in the nation, and Campbell, a school well respected throughout the Southeast.

The state of Alaska, as majestic as it may be, enacts a different set of guidelines to license it's pharmacists. All of Alaska's pharmacists are from somewhere else, because the state does not have it's own pharm-school (not surprising though, the entire population is under 700k). Alaska requires a new pharmacist to have at least 500 non-educational hours of supervised practice before it will grant a license to a recent pharm-school graduate. This law has been frustrating.

But today, folks, oh today is the day. Today Heather came home from work having completed 502 hours. Tomorrow, we leave for NC, and when she returns to work (hopefully the Board of Pharmacy has processed her paperwork by then) she will be a licensed staff pharmacist at St. Elias Specialty Hospital.

Sk'doosh!

Congrats, Heather! Now you get to be the thrower.