Light-work

A Piggy Bank and Ant Econ 101

Yesterday was a historic day for Wall-Street - everyone thought "The Wall Street Bailout" was a done deal. But when the Congressional voting closed at 1:43 PM, the Dow went bungee jumping. Within the span of a few minutes, the free-fall frittered almost a trillion dollars of market value into the wind. When the bounce was out its bungee, the Dow had shed over 777 points. Click here for a summary from the Wall Street Journal.

It is possible, even probable, that we are beginning a financial meltdown on a par with the great depression. The pundits are talking about how to save your stocks and investments; the man on the street is wondering whether to stock up on food, gas, and water. Allow me to propose a prudent path that concerns the more practical side of the crisis.

I don't know how bad things will get; does anyone? So measures that depend upon the accuracy of "predictions" into what will happen are iffy, at best. My proposal is simple and relevant to all outcomes - you don't need prophetic insight into the future. This will will help you, no matter what. Interested? I have two words for you: Spend less! I realize that this is a blatant contradiction of what we were told after 9/11. Then, it was our patriotic duty to get out there and spend for the good of the country. I propose we do a quick 180 and learn how to spend less for the greater good. I am convinced that doing so will be good for us, our families, and our country.

Here is an intriguing article from the most recent issue of Readers Digest - check it out. The Hockman family decided to experiment with "no buying for 30 days." A few of their cost saving measures make me uncomfortable - like "borrowing" wireless Internet service from neighbors who don't use encryption. But see if this article doesn't get your wheels turning. We need to replace "thinking like consumers" with "thinking like savers" - this article will help.

Here at Light-Work HQ, we are preparing the lab for some similar experimentation. I am convinced that finding ways to do without, make do on less, and say no to more stuff is the way to go. It makes sense anytime, but especially now. I would love to get your take on this article and the philosophy it espouses. How about running some of your own experiments and sharing with the L-W club members your best ideas about how to spend less?

Such an approach to life is biblically informed - I call it "ant economics."

Go to the ant, O sluggard,
Observe her ways and be wise,
Which, having no chief,
Officer or ruler,
Prepares her food in the summer
And gathers her provision in the harvest.
How long will you lie down, O sluggard?
When will you arise from your sleep?
“A little sleep, a little slumber,
A little folding of the hands to rest”—
Your poverty will come in like a vagabond
And your need like an armed man (Prov. 6:6-11).

The ant is commended as an example of one who does not use times of prosperity as an opportunity to ramp up consumption. She is a saver who creates a surplus, a reserve, upon which she can draw during the lean times. Note, by the way, that she does not need "government intervention" to compel her to adopt this philosophy. She intrinsically KNOWS this approach is linked to her survival. Do you think the next draft of the bailout proposal (you didn't think we were done, did you?) will have some "ant wisdom" in it? Small chance!

Note that someone who fails to learn ant economics is considered a do nothing, a sluggard. The outcome for the guy is indeed compelling. To say that "need" enters like "an armed man," is to say it becomes impossible to oppose its forced arrival. Catastrophe has become a foregone conclusion. A failure to limit consumption in times of plenty and to create a reserve for lean times results in a condition for which there is NO BAILOUT.

So find ways, NOW, to reduce your standard of living and begin filling your piggy-bank for rainy days. It will help keep you afloat as the water rises. And, you will definitely get an "A" in Ant Econ 101!

Hail to You, Oh Majestic Scooter!

Last May, I bought a Yamaha scooter. (Yeah, that's me at left.) A scooter differs from a motorcycle by having a "step-through" frame design and automatic transmission. Scooters also have relatively smaller engines than most motorcyles - click the link above for some pix. The specific model I purchased is named a "Majesty." I find this more than a little ironic. Do the words "scooter" and "majestic" belong next to each other?

Maybe Yamaha thinks the name will be a great marketing ploy, a way to appeal to an elevated demographic. I can hear the marketing guys gushing as they make their pitch to corporate: "Can you imagine the royals sniffing in disdain as they pass the Bentley show room, eyes fixed on a vision of transport fit for a king? If you're a reigning monarch, you want to be seen by the teeming masses. You want (hold breath here for effect) . . .  a Majesty!" (Crank up the music, pull back the curtain, and start the laser light show.)

Hate to tell you guys, but I'm not feelin' the regal magic. A scooter named "Majesty" is still just ... a scooter. So, let's cut the pretentiousness and simply celebrate its scooteriness! I think there's a lot to celebrate. For one, it's fun to drive (except in the rain). It's well thought out with lots of storage compartments - the trunk under the seat will hold 2 helmets or 4 bags of groceries. Very practical!

My favorite feature, though, shows itself when it's time to refuel. Trips to the gas station have been transformed from somber moments of hand-wringing to spontaneous parties of joy. My Toyota Tundra (there's another marketing mystery - but don't get me started) gets about 18 mpg around town - the Majesty does 60-65 mpg. This means that the Tundra uses about 55 gallons of gas to go 1,000 miles while the Majesty uses 16. Every time I top off the tank and see a total under $10, I chuckle in smug satisfaction. (Not too loudly, of course, so I don't disturb my fellow gas-pump patrons in their moments of somber hand-wringing.) Hail to you, oh majestic scooter, champion of conservation, gleaming herald of cost-conscious living, great leader in the fight against global warming! Oh my - did I just just ascribe virtue to a SCOOTER using regal language?

China Sighting!

I was intrigued to see something pop up today - apparently someone in China has visited Light-Work. This is a screen-shot of the clustrmap from Saturday, Sept 27, and it shows a little red dot (which represents 1-9 visits) in the vicinity of Hong Kong. (You can click on the thumb-nail in the column on the far right to access the live version.) This cluster map is updated once a day and uses web addresses as a basis to locate visitors to Light-Work. No one in China had stoppped by, until now. I had wondered if the communist authorities made sure Light-Work is blocked out - but I guess some can access it. Hopefully, more will.

Flabby Faith Has Got to Go

I told you yesterday that my big need is a cure for my little faith. How did I come to this conclusion? Here's a copy of some verses and notes that brought me to this point. Please print out a copy and read through these sixteen Bible passages. I have selected verses and highlighted key phrases that can help you (as they have me) to appreciate the importance of developing my faith muscles.

The current "economic crisis" is a GREAT reminder that flabby faith has got to go. The prosperity we enjoy can beguile us into a sense of security based on stuff. Enough of that stuff! God is the only one worthy of unconditional trust. And when a man has great faith in his faithful God, that's when Jesus takes notice. May God help us all to learn well from whatever financial turmoil lies ahead. May God help us all to make the transition from peewee faith to remarkable faith.

Pray In A Parking Lot

Yes, we have prayed in the Wal-Mart parking lot. I'm convinced that if Jesus came to town, He would head to the marketplace where the people are. So we have tried to follow that example. This is a shot from a few years ago that shows a trailer with signs on it (for a "prayer chapel" if it rains). Throughout the day, intercessors from area churches would check in (see table at right) for an hour and then pray in small groups. We would also have 2-4 "greeters" at each entrance to Wal-Mart in order to solicit prayer requests. You can see three prayer groups in this picture, one in the shade, two in the sun beyond the gazebo. In the course of a day (from 8AM to 8PM), we had several hundred people from over 20 area churches come to pray for our nation and community as well as over 1,000 personal requests from Wal-Mart shoppers.

Real Ultimate Taxpayer Protection

Two previous posts raised seemingly disparate ideas. Dumb Requests and Good Prayers posed this question: What is the best personal request you would make of God? In Ultimate Taxpayer Protection, I quoted and considered Henry Paulsen's testimony before the Senate Banking Committee. Both of these posts orbit around a single pole.

Last week, I was talking with someone from the East Coast who was exploring what God is doing in Memphis. As we were about to part, she asked, "How can I pray for you?" I said something at the time but kept rolling this poignant question over in my mind for days afterwords: What would I MOST WANT people to be praying for on my behalf? And is my answer to that question one of which God WOULD APPROVE?

Now about a week later, here is how I would answer the "how-can-I-pray-for-you" question: "Please ask God to help me become a man who is full of faith." Faith is simply believing what God has said. As faith is exercised, it changes the course of a man's life, it works. I want to become a man who is able to believe what God says when "what God says" is hard to grasp; I want to believe what God says when our culture disagrees; I want to believe what God says even when it requires a dramatic course correction.

So what does this have to do with the current economic situation? When people don't trust the other guy, they are unwilling to do business with him. A "crisis of confidence" is threatening to freeze the market. Freddie, Fannie, Lehman Bro's, and AIG (and countless others?) have really blown it. Congress, the Fed, and the Treasury have made it worse. They have all let us down, they have all given us reason to question whether they have our best interests at heart. But NOT OUR GOD - He can be trusted 100%.

If your security rests on the state of the economy, you're in for a bumpy ride. But if your trust is placed in God, it couldn't be better placed. I am convinced that Jesus wants me (and you?) to have a strong faith and that this is a request that He would be pleased to hear. I am convinced that the "current economic crisis" is a good reminder of why having an ever greater faith in God is the only true protection plan.

Dumb Requests and Good Prayers

This sounds a lot like a genie and lamp incident: In Gibeon, the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream at night; and God said, “Ask what you wish me to give you” (1 Kings 3:5). But this was no genie! The Lord himself came to Solomon, the One who spoke the world into existence, the One by whose power every living things draws breath. What if God appeared to you and inquired, "What should I give you?" What would you ask for?

On the National Day of Prayer, I stood at the entrance to Walmart (along with friends) and asked people a similar question. Here's what we said: "Today is the National day of Prayer and the churches of Collierville are sponsoring a prayer station in the parking lot - how can we pray for you, today?" We received and prayed for over 1,000 prayer requests.

Some folks wanted to win the lottery. Many shared concerns for the health of friends and family members. A few disclosed their need for spiritual guidance and strength. So what did God think of these requests? Not all requests are created equal. God makes a distinction between them - and discerns some that are more noble than others. When Solomon answered the Lord, his request was one of the good ones - here's how God responded: It was pleasing in the sight of the Lord that Solomon had asked this thing (1 Kings. 3:10).

If God appeared to you and posed the same question, what would you say? Would yours be a dumb request or pleasing prayer? What would be the BEST request you could possibly make? What would you like God to grant you, something that would prompt Him to say, "Now that's a good prayer request!"

Ultimate Taxpayer Protection?

If you suspect that Joe won't pay his debts, you're not going to loan him some money; If you think Ralph is cooking the books, you won't want to invest in his company; If you have reason to believe Peter sells defective merchandise as new, you won't go to his store -  A market cannot function without trust. No one will risk parting with what they possess for fear of being cheated, swindled, or defrauded.

This was the core problem faced by the financial guru's last week. The market was approaching such a point of paralysis where all commerce would halt for the lack of trust. Let me illustrate how this works. The most recent report from the Fed (click here and go to page 30) indicates that 46% percent of those with a credit card carry a balance that averages $2,100. (The mean, or middle number, is $5,100.) This report is for 2004 and the 2007 version has not yet been released, so I suspect my numbers are a little low. But it will still work fine for our illustration.

What would be the result if all the credit card companies became concerned about being paid back? What if they folded their arms and said, "No more Mr. Nice-Guy? Pay off your balance in the next 10 days or we will be by to pick up enough stuff to cover the balance." The distressed credit card account holder might attempt to come up with the money by getting a loan. Let's assume for purposes of our illustration that all the banks in town have heard about "Operation: No More Mr. Nice Guy" and have closed their credit windows, too. No new loans are available. So what's a person to do now? How many of those 46% of all US households are about to go bankrupt because someone else won't trust them to pay?

Looking through their crystal ball, the Fed and Treasury discerned that just such a scenario was only a few transactions away but on a much larger scale. Here's a current article from MarketWatch that summarizes the current discussion that is in full swing. Henry Paulson gave testimony before the Senate Banking Committee, today, and I came across this curious line in his transcript: The ultimate taxpayer protection will be the market stability provided as we remove the troubled assets from our financial system. There are LOTS of references to "restoring confidence" in his remarks, but this line captures one of the key mechanisms for doing so that leaves my confidence less than restored.

Here's my translation of his statement: "You, the taxpayer, will receive a stupendous benefit as we purchase, on your behalf, all the worst possible loans we can find. We will take off anyone's hands the loans that should never have been made in the first place. Now those companies can get along just fine because they won't have the toxic loans messing up their balance sheets. The tax payers will own them and we can all have our confidence restored in these fine financial institutions."

Do you feel like this is the "ultimate taxpayer protection?" Or perhaps you have another name for it?

Save Us From Ourselves, Mr. President!

President Bush, pictured here with the big guns Ben, Henry, and Chris, spoke from the Rose Garden earlier this morning to announce some extraordinary measures for extraordinary times. He underscored the need for decisive action to address the current economic crisis.

Without getting into the merits of the specific measures he outlined, allow me to make two observations. First, the measures being proposed truly are extraordinary, but for reasons that make me nervous. A hallmark of the Reagan revolution was the reduction of government. Make no mistake about what is being proposed - it is a level of market intervention that would make Ronnie blush.

The warrant for this action is a "crisis of confidence." I do agree that an economy cannot function without trust. But there are two ways to "restore confidence." Option one is to restore market integrity. Option two is to successfully convince everyone that things are okay when they are not. Which of two roads has been taken? Some of it sounds like option one. But some of the measures that fit with such a course were glaringly absent - so I have my doubts.

The President said that the question - "How did we get here?" - can be answered later: Now is the time for action. Let me pose it anyway - Who is to blame? Here's my list of culprits, and this is just for starters - the home buyer who got a loan he shouldn't, the appraiser who falsely valued the home, the bank that approved a loan it shouldn't and then bundled it with other bad loans, the funds that bought those high risk bundles, the Fed that kept pumping out money to keep it all rolling, the Treasury that kept selling bonds to churn up more cash, and the general populace who were happy to live off the fruits of this debacle without questioning where it would all lead.

My point is that there is no one culprit, except basic human nature. Now we are reaping what our greed and selfishness have sown, and the government is taking unprecedented measures to rescue us from the consequences. If we are insulated from feeling the pain, won't we just carry on, once our "confidence is restored?" Will these extraordinary measures simply delay the day of reckoning?

King Solomon was no slouch in the wisdom department. Here's one of his nuggets: A man of great anger will bear the penalty, for if you rescue him, you will only have to do it again (Prov. 19:19). Is the same dynamic relevant to more than just a few angry men? If the government rescues us from ourselves, will we have reason to change? I suspect these extraordinary measures will become the norm as our tax dollars are used to save us from ourselves.

Palin and Submission

Does the Bible prohibit a woman from serving as Vice President? Good question! Click here to read the first post on the subject by David Kotter of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW). The next three paragraphs are my summary of David's four part series.

There is no explicit biblical prohibition against a woman serving as a political leader. So we shouldn't forbid a woman from public office using an argument based on the Bible's silence. The Bible is NOT silent about women's role in the church, however - a woman is clearly prohibited from serving as the pastor or elder in a local church. The silence of the Bible on one topic compared with its forthcoming specificity on another tells us mayors, governors, and presidents are not the same as pastors. A woman may serve as the former even though she may not as the latter.

David raises a related question. Even though a woman may serve as Vice-President, is it wise for her to do so?  This is one of those questions that don't have a "one-size-fits-all" answer. Sarah Palin seems to have put a lot on her plate - more than what others would choose for themselves. But her plate is hers to fill. She and her husband should do what they are convinced before God is the right thing for them and their family. Taking advantage of godly counsel will assist them to travel the path of wisdom. But the choice voters face is not about whether they agree with the Palin's decision. The voter's choice concerns Sarah Palin's suitability to serve in the office.

One more thing - Sarah Palin does not have to lose her identity as a woman to be a good Vice-President. She need not become a man. But men and women ARE different. So we are (possibly) about to experience something new and unfamiliar - a woman who leads us as Vice-President. It may take some getting used to.

I think David Kotter's series is good stuff and worth your time - if you go to the first post there are links to the next three. I would put a little nuance on his explanation of a "high view of the church." It is possible for someone to draw a skewed conclusion from his remarks in part 2 where he suggests that, from God's perspective, pastors are more important than presidents. Someone could get the impression that being a pastor is the only truly important job, a job which women are denied. It would be more biblically accurate (and a source of some biblically warranted encouragement) to say that serving in one's appointed role in the church, whether as pastor (men only) or as something else (men and women) is to be involved in the one thing which Jesus is building. That's worth doing!

Schemers Who Scheme Badly

This has been an amazing day in an amazing week of falling dominoes. Except those cute little black blocks are venerable institutions like AIG, Merrill-Lynch, and Lehman Brothers. Here's a summary from the New York Times of the domino of the day, the Fed's rescue of AIG. I was struck by two paragraphs -  here's the first: “This is unique, and the Fed has never done something like this before,” said Allan Meltzer, a professor of economics at Carnegie-Mellon University and author of a sweeping history of the Federal Reserve. “If you go all the way back to 1921, when farms were failing and Congress was leaning on the Fed to bail them out, the Fed always said ‘It’s not our business.’ It never regarded itself as an all-purpose agency.”

Until now! The amount of rescue work the Fed has appointed to itself is staggering. Albeit, there is some sort of triage at work here. The Fed said "no" to Lehman Brothers a few days ago. (Or did they? Lehman appears to be using the Fed's emergency loan program and may have already tapped it for $50 billion.)

I have yet to see an honest reckoning of what all this rescue work is going to cost (including the Treasury Department's dealings with Freddie and Fannie). There are some giant unknowns in the equation. (What don't we know? That's the real question.) If everything goes well in the AIG deal (very big "if"), the Fed could actually make some money. Forbes reports that AIG had to give the Fed an 80% interest in the company. In return they received an $85 billion credit line that, if used to the max, could yield the Fed a cool $27 million A DAY in interest. Is this a "rescue" or a sweet deal?

Even if things don't work out for the Fed, it's nice to know you can scare up some cash when you need it. Here's the other paragraph that ought to get your attention: Fed officials contend that they have ample resources to handle all their new obligations. Unlike a company or a household, the Fed can raise as much cash as it wants by printing money and buying up Treasuries and other securities at will.

As if that wasn't enough, the Fed has yet another safety net. Here's today's announcement from the Treasury. (What a coincidence!) The Treasury is going to auction off $40 billion (or more?) in Treasury Bills and pass the profits onto the Fed. Yes, you read that right. The Treasury is going to make sure the Fed has enough cash under the mattress for those it deems worthy of its benevolence. Even though the Fed can print what it needs, Uncle Sam is going to take out a loan to round up some MORE CASH - Just in case someone else whose risky scheme failed is in need of a "rescue." Doesn't it make you feel good knowing your friendly neighborhood Treasury Department is going into hock for such a noble cause.

The doings of the day have done nothing to allay my fears: The dollar will be further devalued, our national indebtedness will increase, and schemers who scheme badly will get a break, at our expense.

Change We Can Believe In?

One of the Obama mantra's is "Change We Can Believe In." I can add some phrases that make his slogan less catchy but improve it: "I propose change that is worthy of your belief precisely because it is grounded in the truth. Embrace it, not because of its believability, but its validity." Alas, they didn't ask me for feedback before going to the printers. Too bad!

I can understand why they didn't talk to me, however, because those clarifying phrases would take the discussion to another level. It's no small bother when the litmus test becomes "validity" not "believability." Now you have to prove that the specific changes you propose are the best possible response to all of the relevant facts. No more populist arguments that declare a proposed change as the right one for the mere fact that many believe it.

Solomon, one smart cookie and an accomplished kingdom organizer, twice said, "There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death" (Prov. 14:12; 16:25). To our current political debate, Solomon would say it is possible to embrace a "way forward," that is, in point of fact, a journey to disaster. No matter how many jump on the bandwagon, their numbers will not alter its destination.

This kind of flawed logic is what the Obama slogan celebrates. But therein lies it appeal, I suspect, to a younger generation. J. Budziszewski, a professor at the University of Texas, has well captured the  student ethos. Illuminating remarks are captured in his book, Ask Me Anything 2. A sorority coed coos: "Professor Theophilus, since I'm here, would you do me a big big favor?" He agrees to look at her paper and then offers a critique. She responds: "'I don't feel like I've committed a fallacy. You're just not being fair.' Surprised, I look up. The flush had reached her nose, and her eyes looked moist. 'I feel you're just looking for things wrong.'"

This is not just about the "younger generation." A cultural shift is notably evident among the young, but is effecting all ages. Instead of asking "Is it true?", men and women increasingly inquire "How do I feel about it?" The fact that many find Obama's mantra believable is a telling commentary on our changing culture. Personally, I don't find "Change We Can Believe In" very persuasive. But the fact that many do persuades me of an alarming change in progress, the devaluation of truth. I do believe that!

Are You on the Map?

We are getting ready to launch a fresh batch of front porch groups next week at CBC. I thought this was a very cool map that our team leaders have developed. A snapshot is shown at left - Click here to check out the live map. The yellow boxes show the locations of small groups, the green pins show who is signed up, and the red pins show the location of those who haven't yet signed up. It makes it easy for group leaders to locate people who live near them and invite them to their groups.

If you click on the link to the live map, use the slider on the left to zoom in or out. You can also switch to a satellite view or hybrid (see the tabs on the top) if you want some more realism. I sure hope all the red pins turn green in the next week!

Coming to Memphis

"Redemption: A Multicultural Revival" is being planned for Memphis in 2009. Yesterday, I attended a pastor's luncheon to spread the word and meet the speaker, Priscilla Shirer. Here's a link to the website for the event, although it only has basic information. "Redemption" began as the vision of Ellen Olford, the Director of Women's Ministries at Central Church in Collierville. Her dream is for the Memphis Cook Convention Center to be filled on Friday and Saturday, March 27-28, 2009, with women of all races and denominations who desire to see Jesus honored.

My attention was caught on several counts. For one, the number of people attending the event was unlike any "pastor's luncheon" I have seen in Memphis. Check out the picture above to catch a glimpse of the room where hundreds gathered. I don't think I have seen a "pastor's luncheon" in Memphis like it. And it wasn't just the numbers. There was a clear and earnest desire among the people in this room, a corporate longing, for God to move in a city that is in desperate need of Him. Could it be that God is moving among his people to use this event as a springboard for something more enduring?

I was also impressed with Shelby County Mayor, AC Wharton. His brief but thoughtful remarks nailed a concept that I have been thinking about, the limits of what government can do (use laws to limit behavior) and how the people of God can exceed these limits (by using grace to effect heart change). His comments were a poignant call for ambassadors of grace to get busy, to promote the welfare of the city where God has placed them by doing heart work. I loved this line: "Our great problem is not global warming, but cold hearts." When have you heard THAT from an elected official.

Priscilla Shirer is a perfect choice as a speaker. You can read her bio by clicking here. I think she gets it: Racial reconciliation cannot be achieved apart from reconciliation with God through Jesus, His Son. As the daughter of Tony Evans and a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, she brings an appreciation for Bible exposition to her teaching. Here-here! We need more ministry that is about understanding and applying what God has to say, and less yakking over how we each feel about what God has said. This is going to be good.

Irrationality and a Shrewd Few

Traders Maxim #9: "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent." Many have lost a lot by defying this proverb, insisting that the market do what makes sense. Markets can and do behave irrationally. But the current level of irrationality seems to be rising to new heights. Here's a good summary from Paul Farrell at MarketWatch of the absolutely stunning levels of debt the Federal Government is acquiring. Despite this, the dollar is "going up" in value. 

What's so irrational about this? Back in March, I explained how the ability of the federal government to expand the money supply can be used to reduce its debt. Click here to read the full post. Here's the relevant summary: Federal Reserve Notes are a fiat currency (there are no hard assets backing them - click here for more info). Because the US government can print as many dollars as it chooses, someone who owes trillions of dollars has the power to repay each dollar with a dime. Is there any doubt in your mind how this will play out? As the greatest debtor, Uncle Sam has the greatest possible incentive to stoke the fires of inflation. Uncle Sam has both the motive and the means to devalue the dollar.

The "irrationality" of the market lies in a disconnect between growing national debt and the rising value of the dollar. How can this economic oxymoron exist? The expansion of our national debt is the fuel for monetary devaluation which SHOULD provoke a flight away from dollars. Why isn't it? The pundits are pontificating, but I have yet to encounter someone who can give clear and convincing evidence for his hypothesis.

That being said, here are two articles you will find provocative. First, check out this bit of history from Sam Mathid. In "The Robber Baron and the Black Night," Mr. Mathid gives an account of Nathan Rothschild's market activities at the time of the battle of Waterloo. This article certainly illustrates what must be factored into our consideration of the current irrationality: A shrewd few can provoke panic that moves markets in their favor.

This insight animates the hypothesis put forward by Donald Coxe, a respected investment authority who sees in current economic developments the workings of a shrewd few. He is short on hard evidence, to be sure, but long on experience. Here's a link to a summary report filed by John Heinzl.  In short, he suggests that the Fed and Treasury have taken measures to disconnect expansion of national debt from currency devaluation as a means to prop up the financial sector.

Even if Mr. Coxe is wrong, the summer expansion of what was already a staggering level of national debt is a debacle that will not slip quietly into the night. Something wicked does indeed this way come. Irrationality might prevail for a season, but sooner or later (probably sooner) a Cat 5 financial crisis is going to make landfall and batter the dollar .

Praise Pablum

In the good old days, we didn't think about "new songs." If it was in the hymnal, we sang it. If it wasn't, we didn't. Simple. Safe. Reliable. We still have the old hymnals at church - they're in boxes in the attic. Now we are on the praise interstate. Not simple, not safe, very iffy. New songs are flying at us so fast we hardly see one coming before it's a speck in the rear view mirror. We are using a "hymnal," it just happens to be a constantly changing compilation as "tired" songs leave and new songs are added.

Suppose you find a song that would be a good one for your congregation. Assuming it's a song that your people like, considerable time and energy will be spent in training your people how to sing it. My subjective protocol is this: 4 + 2 + 1. Include the song in your worship set four times in one month. Then include it at least twice in the next month. Use it at least once a quarter thereafter. If a "new song" isn't worth that kind of commitment, then it probably isn't worth adding to your congregation's "living hymnal."

If you are going to invest THAT kind of time and energy in a new song, it better be worth it. How do you decide? At CBC, we use this phrase, Dogs Love Singing Music Confidently, to remind us of the five criteria for evaluating every new chorus. (I am not sure if dogs really do love singing music with confidence, but can you conceive of dogs doing anything tentatively?) These are all subjective criteria, and your weighting of a given song may differ from mine. But, I believe the use of all five criteria is critical. Here's what D-L-S-M-C stand for:

Doctrinally Sound -  Most praise music is not rife with heresy. But it does have a lot of "fuzzy doctrine." It lacks precision. It takes doctrinal concepts that beg for clarity and makes them muddy. Or it bleeds into generic spirituality - songs that could be sung with conviction by those who embrace something other than a conservative evangelical perspective. We need music that boldly and in no uncertain terms champions the truths we confess and the allegiance that defines us.

Lyrically Interesting - it is easy to write a praise chorus, but very challenging to write one that captures truth and devotion in a new light. Lyrically interesting praise music is arresting, provocative, fresh. It captures a concept in words that make us look at our faith with new eyes.

Singability - Contemporary Christian artists have given us some great songs. Some are not well-suited to congregational singing because they are so highly stylized or have a complicated melody. At CBC, we choose songs that match the congregation's singing ability. This, by the way, is a harder criteria for praise leaders to evaluate because of their musical competence. The more skilled the musician, the more important it is for him/her to understand, appreciate, and be sensitive to the musical skill level of his/her people.

Musically Interesting - death to boring music! We choose songs with an interesting melody and chord structure. Granted, it is a challenge to balance this factor with the previous. Some songs are musically interesting precisely because they rely on elements that diminish their singability. But, we cannot allow "singability" to press us into using only what is musically boring. By the way, musical interest can be diminished by excessive repetition. Beware the song with too many "repeats." Also, when a song becomes a congregational favorite, be careful you don't wear it out. Once you have completed the learning curve (4 + 2 + 1), extend its life by carefully limiting its use.

Contribution - this is probably our most subjective factor. If the message of a chorus is a duplication of something for which we already have a stable of good choruses, why invest all the time and energy into introducing another? We look for songs that declare what our people have yet to say but must. We find choruses that fill holes.

By the way, here's my challenge for song-writers - write songs that fill a need for the body of Christ. What is missing in our declarations of doctrine and devotion? As you scan what the church is singing, ask yourself what Jesus is longing to hear from His people, and put it to music that is doctrinally clear, lyrically and musically interesting while still being singable. The God whom we honor is worthy of more than a steady stream of praise pablum!

Pick One from the Fifty

Yesterday I posted a list of 50 Ways to Make a Difference in the lives of others. (Click on the title to download a copy.) Each phrase that is highlighted (yellow = positive; green = negative) describes a means by which to affect others. Let me make a few observations about these highlighted phrases:

1. Some are repeats. The most repeated is "love one another" which appears in Rom. 13:8; 1 Thess. 4:9; 1 Pet. 1:22; 1 John 3:11, 23; 4:7, 11. It is also echoed in slightly different phrases ("Be devoted to one another in brotherly love" - Rom. 12:10; "through love serve one another" - Gal. 5:13; "increase and abound in love for one another" - 1 Thess. 3:11; "fervently love one another from the heart" - 1 Pet. 1:22; keep fervent in your love for one another" - 1 Pet. 4:8). It's negative counterpart is "hating one another" found in Titus 3:3. Obviously, "loving one another" is a biggie - one of those "all-terrain" ministries that is appropriate for every situation.
2. Some of these "50 ways" are specific to a certain situation. For example, check out 1 Thess. 5:13-15. While patience is something to be expressed toward "all men," admonition, encouragement, and help are best suited to "the unruly," "the faint-hearted," and "the weak," respectively. It is clear that a mismatch would be a disaster: Encouragement is NOT what the unruly need. And admonition is totally inappropriate for the fainthearted. In other words, some of the "50" must be used with discernment, the right one for the right situation.
3. It is possible to categorize the "50" by whether they focus on an attitude, speech, or action. For example, Col. 3:12-13 enjoins us to "put on a heart of compassion." That's an attitude. "Let us not become boastful" (Ga. 5:26) is about speech. When Gal. 5:13 says "through love serve one another" it is emphasizing action (service) that is fueled by an attitude (love).

So what are your observations from this list? What is this list calling you to do? It can be daunting, but perhaps taking small steps is a good approach. Once a week, take out this list and read it. Ask God to bring to mind a specific person or a specific situation where you can put one of the "50 ways" into action. Then follow through with what He is prompting you to do.

By the way, this list is just the beginning. One of those study projects I would love to do involves a comprehensive compilation of all the biblical ways we can positively influence others. But you don't have to wait for me to complete that study. You can do your own! Just pick a New Testament epistle. Read through it carefully to identify every term or phrase which describes how one person can positively influence or benefit another. Think of it as an easter egg hunt - collecting hidden treasures as you read your Bible. Once a week, look at what's in your basket of collected principles. Ask God how you can develop an attitude, or reshape your speech, or take action on behalf of another. As you do, you will be doing your part to "present every man complete in Christ" (Col. 1:28).

50 Ways to Make a Difference

At first glance, Paul's description of our mission seems more than just daunting; it looks impossible. He declares,"We proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so that we may present every man complete in Christ" (Col. 1:28). How can we "present every man complete" when, in the final analysis, we do not have the power to determine another's choices? Answer: Just because we cannot control someone else doesn't mean we are incapable of influencing them, and it is at this level that Paul is fully engaged.

So how, exactly, does one positively influence another toward the goal of completeness in Christ? Two "means" are identified in this verse - admonition and teaching. But there are many more. I have compiled a list that cites over fifty of these means. The list is not comprehensive - but it gives you a good feel for the diversity of ways we can have impact on others. Click here to download this list. Print out a copy and spend some time studying it. We can compare notes tomorrow.

Palin's Principles

I thoroughly enjoyed listening to Sarah Palin's VP acceptance speech last night. Just in case you missed it, I have attached a copy of the text that was submitted to the AP. (The highlights on it are mine.) Click here to check it out. Mrs. Palin did move off-script on occasion - I loved her hockey mom shtick: "What's the difference between a hockey mom and a pit-bull? One wears lipstick." But as she brought home her message, I couldn't help but appreciate John McCain's pick for a running mate. We are definitely in for some fun in the next 60 days!

There was lots to like in her speech. I have highlighted some of my favorite "zinger" lines in the down-loadable copy. For example, her retort to those who have fussed about the thinness of her credentials for Veep was delicious: "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities."

But there was more to this speech than just well delivered barbs. It articulated a decidedly different view of government, and the view suits me much better. The difference is simple: Obama wants to take more of your money so he can give you more restrictions. McCain/ Palin want less of your money and want to get government out of your way.

I am sure there is a lot about Sarah Palin that is unknown. The media are feverishly parsing Palin's words and scrutinizing her life in search of cracks and flaws. But if her speech is any indication of who she is and what she stands for - knowing her will only improve the odds of John McCain winning the White House.