The MonT-SteR REPORT

On salt and light

2008-11-12T01:02:00.005-05:00

Our small group spent two weeks studying the passages in all three of the Synoptic Gospels where Jesus refers to His followers as the "salt of the earth" and "light of the world" (see Matthew 5:1-16, Mark 9:33-50, and Luke 14:25-35).

We found that our working definition of what it is to be salt and light tends to be woefully shallow and one-dimensional.

I attempted to synthesize the issues raised by all three passages into a summary statement. While this is definitely more expansive than the typical definition you'll get from your average Joe Christian, it isn't by any means exhaustive.

Give it a read -- and let me know what you think:

Being salt and light in the world is an all-encompassing way of life that is divinely sanctioned, from top to bottom. It recognizes the unvarnished truth of our station before God, as well as our relationship to one another (within the community of faith) and to the wider world.

Before God, we are spiritually impoverished and in desperate need of His cleansing touch. In response, we pursue God and His righteousness by mourning our sins and dealing ruthlessly with our sinful tendencies -- for God will not brook split allegiances.

Before one another, we adopt a posture of openheartedness -- an eagerness to freely and peaceably receive, serve, and minister to one another in Christ's name, and a recognition that worldly hierarchicalism in all its forms is a prideful and bitter poison that has no place amongst Jesus' followers.

Before the world, we walk not in the brash, self-righteous flamboyance of the pointed finger or the upturned nose, but with mercy, with the kind of winsome, gentle, fervent devotion to God that speaks far better than mere words can. And when the world rejects or seeks to hurt us for this, we humbly entrust ourselves to God, being counted among those of whom the world was not worthy.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

6 reasons why I'm voting against Obama

2008-11-03T23:14:00.003-05:00

For the passing of his grandmother, he has my sincere condolences. But he's still bad for our country. I know this will offend some people -- nothing has the power to alienate like a discussion about politics. Please know that I am not attempting to be deliberately offensive. I'm simply sharing my mind and heart, in the hope of persuading some wayward, last-minute undecideds who stumble across my blog.

Check back here tomorrow night for my traditional Election Day coverage. Come what may, we'll have some fun with it.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Enough is enough

2008-10-09T22:48:00.009-04:00

Time to man up, mainstream media (MSM).

There are some pointed questions I have not heard asked of Sen. Obama vis-a-vis Bill Ayers. Charlie Gibson had an opportunity to ask them, but elected not to. Instead, he unquestioningly swallowed Obama's flimsy line about how Bill Ayers is "somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when [Obama] was just eight years old."

Both Barack and Michelle Obama have stated that Ayers is simply a well-known education policy wonk in the Chicago area. Mrs. Obama said yesterday on Larry King that there isn't anyone heavily into education policy in the Chicago area "who doesn't know Bill Ayers." It's an obvious attempt to downplay Sen. Obama's ties to Ayers by asserting that, in Chicago politics, associating with Ayers is almost unavoidable -- and no big deal.

What Sen. Obama and his wife conveniently omit is that, to this very day, Ayers is utterly unrepentant about having committed (or been party to) violent terrorist acts against the United States. It's a matter of public record. And I have not heard Sen. Obama directly repudiate Ayers for that (not just the "detestable acts" committed 40 years ago) in any way, shape, or form.

Not. One. Single. Time.

He is content, rather, to immediately point fingers at McCain's campaign for engaging in "the politics of personal destruction" by having the unmitigated gall to bring Ayers up at all. And the MSM happily indulges this narrative, which is nothing short of a national disgrace.

The truth, Senator, is that while Ayers is not currently one of your campaign consultants, your association with the man has been more than casual or incidental to your political career. You may have been eight years old when Ayers attempted to kill innocent people, but you have chosen to freely associate with him during your adult years in multiple contexts.

Here are the questions I want Obama to be asked:

At what point in your adult life, Senator, did you become aware of Ayers' history?
How did this knowledge affect your relationship with Ayers (whatever its nature)?
If you knowingly associated yourself with this man after learning that he was an unapologetic domestic terrorist, does that disqualify you from being President of the United States?
Does it bother you that Ayers has publicly stated that he has absolutely no remorse over having tried to take innocent lives?
Are you prepared now to publicly denounce not only the "detestable acts" he committed 40 years ago, but also the cavalier, hard-hearted attitude he currently has about having plotted and/or carried out multiple acts of attempted murder and wanton destruction?
Given Ayers' deeds and rhetoric, Senator, it would not be unreasonable to label him a Marxist revolutionary in the mold of Lenin. Why do you suppose he elected to 1) personally host a gathering that launched your first run for the Illinois State Senate in 1995, and 2) contribute to your 2001 reelection campaign?

Quickie debate reaction

2008-10-02T23:34:00.004-04:00

I have so many things I want to talk about, but there's no time this evening. I'll have to limit myself to top-level reactions to the VP debate tonight:

Positives for Biden. The good senator from DE left the angry, pompous so-and-so persona at home tonight. Since I was a teenager, I've found Biden to be insufferable. Tonight, he was likable, even gentle. Of course, he had to be. His usual bombast and bluster would have ruined him. He was also articulate, and played the elder statesman role well. He was disingenuous as heck, but he looked and sounded good.
Positives for Palin. She also performed well, and obviously did her homework. She didn't flinch, or look as though she was cowed by the stage or the person at the other podium. And she looked into the camera, as Obama did in the first presidential debate. I think she's a good communicator with the ability to connect with the common man (or woman). Roger Ebert snobbishly labeled her a "provincial," but that's actually part of her strength. Ebert and his ilk equate provincial with stupid or uninitiated. For my own part, I'm sick of ensconced Washington elites who have educated themselves into imbecility (to coin a phrase from Malcom Muggeridge) and are experts only at mucking everything up. I think it's high time some more "provincials" with common sense and flyover-country values had a chance at running Washington. But I digress...
Negatives for Biden. Not too much I can say here, because it would require elaboration I don't have time for. For me, the negatives had to do with the substance of his assertions. For example, equating McCain's vote against a troop funding bill that had a withdrawal time-table attached to it with Obama's vehement anti-war stance was laughable. Which brings me to...
Negatives for Palin. Palin's robotic adherence to the lines she's been fed by her handlers was frustrating. Note to McCain's advisors: For God's sake, just let this woman be the unapologetic conservative she is, will ya? Biden handed her so much red meat to pounce on, and she hardly bit on any of it. As a result, he got in a lot of free punches that she could/should have knocked out of the park. Grr...

Overall, I think the debate was largely a draw, but that plays in Obama/Biden's favor. The McCain camp has a lot of work to do. Can they pull it out? I have my concerns at this juncture.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Making lemonade out of a lemon

2008-10-01T23:33:00.003-04:00

The lemon, in this case, is my 24" iMac's hard drive. I officially pronounced it dead today.

So, the new one is on its way. Once it gets here, a couple of Mac nerds at work are going to help me perform hard-drive transplant surgery on my poor 'puter. My sister had the unmitigated temerity to suggest that I just bag it and buy a PC. The only problem with that is that I would have to use the PC. What do you think I am, a glutton for punishment?

"But Rob, but Rob," my handful of readers exclaim, "isn't your iMac causing you aggravation already? What's the diff?"

The "diff," as you so eloquently put it, is that PCs are contemptible gutter trash. How's that grab ya!

Honestly, though, I'm blogging right now on my Frankenmac, which is a blue and white G3 with all kinds of funky, extraneous upgrades in it. A little slow, yes, but it's reliable as anything, in spite of the fact that it's nearly a decade old. I've owned a number of Macs over the years, and they've generally been durable and dependable. This iMac is one of two exceptions. The other was a venerable Performa 6200 that is still operational to this day. In each case, the hard drive died prematurely -- obviously a lemon. In the case of the Performa, the machine was still under warranty when it croaked, so the repair was free. The iMac, unfortunately, is not.

Even more unfortunate is the treatment I've received from local repair shops. The Apple store in Norfolk won't let me buy a hard drive on my own; they will only do the repair if I pay through the nose for Apple parts. Thanks, but no thanks -- my money doesn't grow on trees, you know. There's another Apple authorized dealer in town called the Mac Specialist that could probably fix it, but the gentleman I spoke with on the phone today was just insufferably rude and condescending. Plus, they wanted to charge me a ridiculous sum for a SCSI cable several years ago. I just can't bring myself to do business with them.

So, I'll make lemonade out of this lemon by making the repair myself. In the meantime, here I am, kvetching and rambling to nobody in particular about my iMac while the economy is in turmoil and the world teeters on the brink of mass conflict and upheaval. That's perspective for ya!

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Live debate coverage

2008-09-26T21:00:00.002-04:00

Go to my brand spankin' new Twitter page: www.twitter.com/themontster.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

2008-09-25T23:09:00.003-04:00

Some thoughts on recent events in rapid-fire succession:

McCain's campaign suspension. Unorthodox, bold, smart. McCain's certainly a risk taker -- even though I've found his politics odious at times, I also find it refreshing that he's willing to think and act outside the overly scripted, focus-grouped, poll-driven box that is modern American politics. Doubtless McCain's camp brooded over the political calculus of temporarily dropping his campaign, but I think it says something meaningful and positive about McCain that he was willing to do it in the first place. Plus, he's once again put Obama on defense; all he could do was react. And I don't think his reaction has been terribly smart so far. If Obama appears at tomorrow's debate alone, he will look like an ostentatious stage hound fiddling while Rome burns. I think it really does have the potential to be the death knell of his campaign.
The mortgage bailout. I have to admit that I don't fully understand the crisis. But my reaction has been along these lines:
- Where do these governmental incursions into the market end? What happens if the U.S. automobile industry starts to tank? Or the airlines? Do we have to bail them out too? Where does it end? We're on a slippery slope of socialism here, and one need only look to the historical example of the former USSR to see how well that works.
- Besides, as a taxpayer, I don't want to be on the hook for business failures I have no control over. Nor do I want to be on the hook for the unrepentant malfeasance of politicians, bureaucrats, and Wall Street fat cats.
- Speaking of bureaucracy, the idea of giving Henry Paulson -- an unelected official -- a blank check for $700 billion to use at his discretion seems like lunacy. Our national debt is already $6 TRILLION. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac already put taxpayer dollars on the line because they are GSEs (government-sponsored enterprises) that borrow heavily from foreign investors to do business. I resent the fact that Paulson et al (President Bush included) are out there fear-mongering, telling us that we have no choice but to further compound the taxpayers' outlay or face economic meltdown. Isn't bureaucratic incompetence and corruption partly to blame for this mess in the first place?!? Sorry guys -- the economy may be having problems, but I'm skeptical about the Chicken Little approach. If we need a solution, I'd prefer a thoughtful, non-Marxist one to the put-the-taxpayer-in-a-hammer-lock variety.
Planning to start my interaction with Gary Grieg's defense of Lakeland soon -- stay tuned!
On a lighter note, I really enjoyed LSU's comeback at Auburn on Saturday. Looking forward to seeing them develop over the rest of the season. It's going to be a great ride again this year. Geaux Tigers!

That is all. For now, anyway...

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Puttin' the hurt on daddy

2008-09-23T00:01:00.003-04:00

My little Mark really did a number on me last week with a headbutt to the eye that would have made George "The Animal" Steele proud:

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Wacky Wednesday News Digest #4

2008-09-10T21:51:00.007-04:00

As promised, here's the return of this tMR feature.

Listen as I laugh through stories of burglars who do laundry and use sausages as weapons, as well as a recalcitrant lawn mower that met with a grisly end at the hands of its owner.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Why so serious?

2008-09-09T23:13:00.001-04:00

The MonT-SteR's favorite childhood friend, David, had an amusing response to the "About Me" section of my Facebook profile, which reads as follows:

Howdy. I'm Rob.

I'm a Christian man who loves God, family, and friends. If you ask those who know me, they might tell you I'm a study in contrasts -- simultaneously one of the silliest and most serious people they know.

David wrote the following on my Facebook wall:

You ARE one of the silliest and most serious people I know. You nailed that one. I wonder if you are the only person on Facebook to list both The Office and The Bible as your favorite ways to spend your time. A great example of how polemics and spaghetti go well together with a side of garlic bread. Actually, that sounds delicious.

Quintessential David. I'm still chuckling over it. In any case, to honor the astuteness of David's observations, I'm making a post that focuses on lighter fare. And given that I've been kvetching about politics and the state of American Christendom lately, I think a new edition of the Wacky Wednesday News Digest is in order for tomorrow (take a listen to episodes 1, 2, and 3).

In other news, I have a new favorite salsa. Baja Cafe salsa has been on sale at the local Food Lion for half price, so I picked up some recently just to try it. The verdict?

YUM!

Definitely restaurant quality stuff. It just has that special tang that the salsa at good Mexican restaurants has. My favorite thing about the restaurant salsa is the taste of fresh cilantro that comes with every bite. Baja Cafe approaches that flavor, which is why I love it so.

Check it out! I've found it in the refrigerated section at our store, in the general area of things like cream cheese and all those canned Pillsbury doughs (doesn't the idea of canned dough kinda wig you out?).

Finally, I can't let the night pass without mentioning Barack Obama's horrific gaffe today in Lebanon, VA. In an attempt to cast doubt on the authenticity of the McCain-Palin ticket's change mantra, he said, "You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig." This would probably be a non-issue if it weren't for the humorous line in Palin's acceptance speech about lipstick being the sole differentiator between a hockey mom and a pit bull. Whether Obama intended to capitalize on that line for his own zinger or not, the audience almost certainly took it that way -- which had the net effect of making it look like Obama publicly called Palin a pig.

Did he really mean to do that? I want to give him the benefit of the doubt (honestly, though, I have my suspicions). In any case, I do feel a little bad for the guy; if it really was a slip, I have to imagine that he'll be kicking himself for such a poor choice of words. In the meantime, friends, sit back, relax, and enjoy tomorrow's media frenzy.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

More MonT-SteR Consternation

2008-09-06T23:11:00.015-04:00

"Bias? What bias? We don't see any bias."

Since the savaging of Sarah Palin began in the press last Friday, the party line of Obama's media camarilla (the Matthews/Olbermann wing in particular) has been one of blithe -- or feigned -- innocence.

"What is this bias you speak of?"

Some readers of my blog have told me I'm a whiner for complaining about media bias, but I'm so frustrated right now that I don't care. It doesn't upset me that people have opinions that diverge from my own -- I'm not so naive as to expect that everyone is going to agree with me. If you don't, that's fine. Feel free to disagree. Feel free to champion your pet ideology, worldview, or political doctrine. That's what the First Amendment is all about. It's a free country, thank God.

What bothers me is when journalists pretend to be impartial when they are obviously, palpably, unashamedly in the tank for modern political liberalism and all it entails. Either they think they can get away with it because they believe the public is entirely populated with dim-witted dullards and dolts, or they are so extremely self-deluded that they genuinely don't see it.

Most of the media's high inquisitors have united in the snide, boorish, public deprecation of Palin's fitness as a mother while touting her as a lightweight (do you Obama supporters really want to go down this road?). Greta van Susteren, on the other hand, is the only mainstream media personality I've seen who actually took the time to talk to some people who know Palin, have worked alongside her, and personally observed her work as Alaska's governor.

Since the lion's share of the media seems content to cast aspersions, I thought it worthwhile to post the video of Susteren's interviews here:

In other news, I stumbled across a blog run by someone who attended the same conservatory I did for my undergraduate studies; he started there when I was in my second year. This gentleman (I'll henceforth refer to him pseudonymously as "Archie") had harsh words after Sarah Palin's speech on Wednesday:

I knew I wasn't going to like her (with my personal Turn-Ons [sic] being "smart chicks," and my Turn-Offs [sic] being "hockey, bad hair, and people who don't believe global warming has any human cause"), but I was still a little stunned by the sarcastic nastiness of statements like, "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer' -- except that you have actual responsibilities." Wow. Dissing Obama for working on antipoverty programs. This chick is a d**k.

Where does a Hungry MonT-SteR start with this? Sorry, Archie, but I gotta politely take issue with you for a moment:

The entire comment is self-stultifying in the extreme. One of its main premises is that Palin should be opposed (or disliked) because of her "sarcastic nastiness." Then Archie proceeds to make fun of her hair, imply that she is stupid, deride her for being a hockey mom, and label her with a crude expletive. Okay, based on his own logic, I hereby dismiss Archie's comments in toto and with prejudice because of his own "sarcastic nastiness." Fair's fair, dude.
Ugh, the climate change canard. I wonder how many devotees of pop global warming theory have paused to consider that climate change is nothing new, that it predates humanity itself, and that the natural forces that cause it (like the sun or volcanic activity) are ancient, more powerful than the collective carbon footprint of mankind, and completely outside the purview of our influence or control. Does climate change exist? Most certainly. But don't accuse me or anyone else of stupidity or ignorance because we doubt that anthropogenic global warming is a scientific fact -- especially when recent global temperature data suggests the very opposite.
It's doubtful that Obama's work as a "community organizer" was simply an anti-poverty program. This has been little explored by the press, but Obama's community organizer days were largely in partnership with ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) -- a radical national network of local-level activists with a history of engaging in voter fraud, political intimidation, and economically deleterious policies (go here and here for more). These policies include a Marx-inspired attempt to "break the system" by actively flooding the welfare rolls, with a view toward inciting socio-political upheaval and revolution. ACORN markets itself as an anti-poverty organization, but I fail to see how encouraging dependency on the state could ever reverse the fortunes of the impoverished. I'm not appealing to guilt by association here, but it is noteworthy that Obama partnered with this organization and even trained some of its leadership in Chicago. What is clear is that he has a longstanding relationship with ACORN, and that in some measure he is beholden to them politically to this day.

For the sake of argument, let's say that it really was just an anti-poverty program. We might call that laudable, but does it necessarily follow that it amounts to a presidential resumé? Given that Obama's legislative experience consists of voting "present" an inordinate number of times at the state level and has little to commend itself in terms of leadership, reform, or innovation at the federal level (the guy hasn't even finished ONE TERM as a U.S. senator), is it really "sarcastic nastiness" to question his qualifications? Is it "sarcastic nastiness" to humorously juxtapose the experience and responsibilities of an ACORN-style community organizer with those of a city mayor? Keep in mind that it was Obama and his campaign/media surrogates who first denigrated Palin's mayoral experience. I suppose I could be persuaded to grant that the rhetorical force of Palin's one-liner was unkind, but it hardly rises to the level of "sarcastic nastiness." Certainly, its substance has merit.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Quickie update

2008-09-03T23:47:00.001-04:00

Watched:

Sarah Palin and her "warm-up acts." In all, a good round of speeches for the GOP -- good use of humor, but hard-hitting as well. Palin is in a class by herself as the poised, articulate, hockey mom of a Washington outsider. My instinct is that she's going to win over a lot of the swing voters. But will they stay? This is why I'm eager for all the allegations ("trooper gate," and now the Enquirer is alleging an affair) to get cleared up once and for all; I doubt the media will cooperate. Part of me wished that Palin addressed at least some of this stuff in her speech tonight, but I suppose that would be impolitic. She sure can't afford to let the mud-slinging and calumnies go unanswered for too long. One thing McCain doesn't need is baggage heading into Nov.; as happy as I am with Palin, that's the one thing that worries me right now. Hope it all comes out in the wash.

Watching:

Tropical Storm Hannah. They're predicting that it will reach hurricane strength before making landfall, but at this point they don't think it will have enough time to grow into a major hurricane. The projected landfall has been steadily inching north and east for the past several days. Now, it appears that Virginia Beach could get a direct hit by the right-front quadrant of the hurricane very shortly after it makes landfall south of the Outer Banks. We're planning to evacuate if Hannah reaches anything higher than minimum Cat 2 strength. That's about what Isabel was when we weathered that storm in 2003, and I wouldn't want to try to wait out anything worse -- especially now that we have crumb crunchers in the house. :)

More tomorrow...

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Labor Day news digest

2008-09-01T14:39:00.014-04:00

Some things percolating in The MonT-SteR's head:

Thank God that Gustav is weaker than expected and not drowning New Orleans.
Barack Obama won the Democratic nomination for President. Politics aside, when you consider that Jim Crow laws were in effect less than a decade before Your One and Only Favorite MonT-SteR™ was born (and I'm a thirty-something Gen-Xer), you have to admit that we've come a long way. Obama may not be the best choice for President (in my estimation, he's most certainly not), but it's a good day in America when an African-American has the opportunity to be the best choice in the first place. Congrats to him, and to our entire nation. It really is an important landmark.
Since McCain's "Meet Sarah Palin" rally on Friday, Gov. Palin has come under intense fire from liberal bloggers who alleged that her 4-month-old son, Trig, is not her baby. They went so far as to say that Palin faked her own pregnancy in order to cover up her oldest daughter's out-of-wedlock pregnancy. Photos showing a trim looking Gov. Palin (despite being 7 mos. pregnant) and her daughter, Bristol Palin, with a "baby bump" during the same time frame have been cited as "proof" of this conspiratorial thinking.

My first instinct was to dismiss this stuff as the typical bilge that is gleefully spewed by venomous left-wing blogs. It turns out, however, that at least one element of the story is true: Bristol Palin is pregnant out of wedlock. According to a statement released by the Palins today to quell the rumors, Bristol has opted to keep the baby and marry the father.

Some leftists online are breathlessly touting this as the archetypal failure of conservative parenting and abstinence-only education -- an unwarranted logical leap that is borne of ideological allegiance rather than evidence. This can happen to the best of parents, and it's ridiculous to suggest that only conservative parents would be distressed by such a development.

Others are drooling over the prospect that this essentially kills McCain's chances in November. Admittedly, it is an interesting question. How is this going to play with values voters who were energized by Palin's addition to the McCain ticket? Michelle Maulkin over at Hot Air has echoed a thought I had. The Palin family's handling of this situation is a stark contrast to Obama's rhetoric, which views babies born to teenage mothers as unnecessary "punishment" that abortion conveniently remedies. That should be encouraging to pro-lifers -- it demonstrates that the Palin family shares and holds to pro-life values, even under gut-wrenching circumstances.

How does The MonT-SteR feel about all this? Not entirely sure. I can sympathize with the Palins, and recognize that children have the freedom to make choices that fly in the face of loving, consistent parenting. Part of me wishes they had been up front about it, but what family out there wouldn't want to keep something like this as quiet and private as possible? Even so, it appears that the pregnancy was no secret back in Alaska. According to a Time article, residents of Sarah Palin's hometown, Wasilla, were aware of the whole thing and yet unruffled by it:
If you haven't guessed yet, the people here [in Wasilla] are genuinely friendly. Even those in Palin's inner sanctum who have been told since Friday not to talk to reporters by McCain's media team, are almost apologetic that they can't be neighborly and chat, since you came all this way to little Wasilla. And those who can talk, do. All weekend they had the decency not to pretend that they didn't know the governor's eldest daughter was pregnant. But they also expected decency in return, that I wouldn't be the kind of person to make sport out of a young girl's slip.
This indicates that there was no attempt at some dastardly cover-up by the Palins. It also means that the so-called Kossacks over at Daily Kos who started this flap should be ashamed of themselves for 1) jumping to unfounded conclusions based on their own judgmental hearts and wishful thinking, and 2) rudely delving into intensely sensitive and private family matters in order to score ill-gotten political points.

As for me, I'm inclined to like Sarah Palin. I don't think this episode disqualifies her from being the veep candidate at all. But, I continue to hold a "wait and see" posture before I jump entirely on the bandwagon. I like what I've seen so far, but I want to get a better idea of what she'll bring to the ticket. Hopefully, it isn't additional baggage. In any case, my prayers are with her and her family as they weather a difficult time under heavy scrutiny by an unfriendly and biased mainstream media.

We'll just have to wait and see how this unfolds, and what the average American voter thinks of all this. It'll be interesting to see the fallout in the daily tracking polls.
The Lakeland Revival appears to have suffered something of an implosion, leaving in its wake troubling questions about Todd Bentley and the leaders who gave oversight to the movement. I mention this as someone who watched some of the Lakeland meetings via God TV, and was undeniably touched by the presence of God. In addition, a number of respected friends and acquaintances traveled to Lakeland to attend the meetings in person and brought back wonderful testimonies of genuine encounters with the Living God. While I acknowledge the hand of God in Lakeland, there were some things I observed about the meetings and the church's reaction to them that made me uneasy. For the sake of brevity, I shan't enumerate them here -- it'll have to wait for another post.

I had reserved comment on this for awhile, because I wanted to explore my questions and misgivings more thoroughly with God before making any statements; I don't level criticisms at what appears to be a move of God lightly. In contrast, Christians of certain stripes didn't have any hesitation about denouncing both Todd Bentley and the apparent outpouring at Lakeland, asserting that it was all unbiblical at best, downright demonic at worst. Others, such as Dr. Gary Greig (whom I also respect), found almost unqualified scriptural warrant and sanction of the entire affair. I actually planned to interact with Greig's statement on my blog, and will probably do so in the near future. Those who waved off his defense of Lakeland as "pseudo-scholarship" were too dismissive. Dr. Greig is most certainly not a pseudo-scholar. Nevertheless, I felt that some of his thinking was problematic, and I think it needs to be highlighted from the perspective of a reasoned, fellow charismatic (as opposed to smug hyper-cessationists looking for a theological axe to grind with Pharisaical gusto).

For my own part, I'm in a bit of a deconstructionist phase with respect to some peripheral aspects of the Charismatic movement, which is part of the reason why I reserved comment. I encounter "novelties" in doctrine and practice so frequently these days that I can scarcely keep up with it, and the pressure to just "swallow and follow" (as J. Lee Grady puts it) is palpable. All the while, a voice in the back of my head nags, "Are we sure there's biblical precedent for this? Besides, it seems to me that we don't sufficiently know or practice the basics of the faith. Can we step away from the latest, fantastical stuff that comes down the pike to focus on core (and oft-neglected) aspects of Christian faith and practice?"

I feel this way in part because George Barna has chronicled dangerous trends within American Christendom in recent years, demonstrating that the church at large is failing at basic Christian discipleship. My own anecdotal experience in ministry has confirmed many of his findings. Given that the Charismatic/Pentecostal movement accounts for a growing number of Christians in America, it's foolish to assume that it is immune to the problems enumerated by studies such as Barna's.

Perhaps the apparent denouement of the Lakeland revival (or, at least, Todd Bentley's involvement in it) is indicative of this. In any case, I confess that I failed to do the investigative work necessary (both factually and scripturally) to make discerning pronouncements vis-a-vis Lakeland with any kind of certitude. Next time something like this comes up, I need to be more prepared to have a reasoned, biblically informed, spiritually sensitive voice.

In the meantime, grace, mercy, and prayerfulness are prescribed as the Body of Christ walks through Lakeland's fallout. All I know is that I'd feel terrible if I were in Todd Bentley's shoes; the last thing I'd ever want to do is drag the name of Christ through the mud. It's in moments like that, when our fallenness and disobedience to God catch up to us, that the enemy moves in to condemn us and crush our spirits. There are those in the church who are dancing on Bentley's ministerial grave, and that's a shame. I suspect that the enemy did the very same thing in the wake of Peter's threefold denial of the Lord. Let's not side with the enemy, brothers and sisters; if Peter could be restored by Jesus' loving hand, so can Todd Bentley.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Live comments on the Saddleback Civil Forum

2008-08-16T20:04:00.007-04:00

Well, here's my ultimate take on the whole thing.

I think Obama is a well-spoken man who is at ease with himself. On the stump, I've found him to be rather haughty and arrogant -- the accusation of messiah-complex that is often leveled at him is not without warrant. But tonight, he was self-effacing, conversational, friendly, likable. I can understand why people are taken with him.

If you listen to him carefully enough, however, you hear inconsistencies that cast doubt on the steadiness of his core principles. Recall that when he had to distance himself from Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his speech more or less threw his grandmother under the bus as a knee-jerk racist after the fashion of "typical white people" (Obama attempted to do damage control on that comment after the fact, but not successfully IMHO). Contrast that with tonight, when he told Rick Warren that his grandmother is one of the great sages in his life. I'm confused...

Plus, I just find the lion's share of his thinking and politics noxious. The guy's a socialist -- no two ways about it. His discussion of the Supreme Court's role was just plain weird (I wanted to say inane, but let's be charitable), and his position on abortion is essentially a punt on the central human rights issue so he can maintain a politically expedient pro-choice posture (too bad those in the womb can't vote).

Turning to McCain, readers of my blog know that I'm not his biggest fan. Campaign finance reform was nothing short of a brazen assault on the First Amendment. He was the chief champion of that legislation, and it flies in the face of the oath a president takes to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. Moreover, he's been a sell-out on immigration reform (or, more precisely, amnesty for illegal aliens). So I'm predisposed to being extraordinarily skeptical of McCain as a presidential candidate.

That said, he is a consistently pro-life candidate, which is important to me. The annual slaughter of 40 million unborn babies is nothing short of a modern holocaust of shocking proportions, and IT MUST END. I could never, in good conscience, vote for someone who is pro-choice. And he does hold to a number of conservative issues (keeping taxes low, tough stance on national security, constitutionalist judges, etc.). From my perspective, he's definitely preferable to Sen. Obama.

I thought McCain did pretty well tonight, although I found him stiff at times (especially when he discussed his personal faith). And he seemed to revert here and there to stump speech mode, something I think Obama avoided more successfully. Even so, I think McCain came across in a surprisingly warm, engaging fashion (as opposed to some stoic, old fart of a curmudgeonly war hero). In any case, in a contest of substance versus fluff, McCain won hands down. His black eyes: a rambling, non-answer on privacy vs. security; no clear enunciation of policy with respect to when and how much America should act as world policeman.

I'd like to express my appreciation to Rick Warren and Saddleback for a number of things:

Thanks for hosting this forum. It was very informative, and I think it gave us a good glimpse into the minds and hearts of the candidates. I appreciate you taking the lead on forging a dialogue between the candidates and the faith community
Thanks, Rick, for asking tough questions that the media will typically shy away from (especially with respect to Obama). I think it was apropos and fair for each candidate to be asked the same set of questions.
I really appreciated the judicious avoidance of direct questions about climate change. I still maintain that Rick Warren is grievously in error for embracing pop global warming theory, and I was really glad not to have to listen to such poppycock tonight. Looking forward to Rick's own "wise flip-flop" on this issue.

With my commentary (mostly) out of the way, here's what I captured of the forum.

8:04 p.m.

Question segment #1 is going to deal with leadership issues.

First question to Barack has to deal with the three wisest people who have influenced him.

His answer:

His wife. She's both wise and honest.
His grandmother. (Would this be the typically white racist grandmother he's alluded to in previous public gaffes?)
Cites Ted Kennedy as an influence in domestic policy (YUCK!). Wants a forum of advisors that have a breadth of views. (I guess this means they would span from left-center to moonbat. :)

Rick Warren (RW): What is the greatest moral failure of your life, and of America?

Barack Obama (BO): Difficult youth. Experimented with drugs. Associates struggles as a young man with selfishness -- so preoccupied with his own dissatisfaction that he couldn't see the needs of others. (A candid answer, I think.) America's greatest moral failure in his lifetime is its failure to abide by the precept of doing good to "the least of one's brethren." Applies to poverty, racism, sexism, and not providing ladders of opportunity.

RW: Common ground and common good. Did you ever go against party loyalty and self-interest in the interest of America?

BO: Cites campaign finance reform. (Blech. This is a terrible example, as it stomps brazenly all over the First Amendment. Sorry, Barack -- not in the best interest of the country.)

RW: What's the most significant position you've held that you ended up changing your mind on?

BO: Welfare reform. Felt that welfare had to be changed, but was concerned that the bill Bill Clinton signed would prove disastrous. But it worked better than anticipated. Convinced that work is the centerpiece of social policy. Provides a sense of both purpose and community. (Obama is to applauded here -- too bad this philosophy doesn't filter into the rest of his policy ideas.)

RW: What's the most gut-wrenching decision you had to make, and how did you process that?

BO: Cites his anti-war stance. (I find this to be a disingenuous answer. Hindsight is 20/20, Barack. He's touting his vaunted prescience with respect to the Iraq war being ill-conceived and unjust. He said he had doubts with respect to WMD from the outset. So even though Russia, France, Britain, Israel, and the US all had intelligence on Saddam's WMD program, you were singularly discerning -- above and beyond the intelligence capabilities of multiple nations. Stop insulting my IQ. Barack's anti-war stance is grounded in ideology before evidence, and as such it was not a gut-wrenching decision at all.)

Commercial break

8:20 p.m.

Rick warren asked Obama about his faith. He's professing that Jesus died for his sins, but says that "hopefully" his sins will be washed away. ("Hopefully" isn't exactly the orthodox Christian position on the efficacy of Jesus' sacrifice, but we won't quibble too much right now.)

Rick says that he's getting to the "tough" questions.

Abortion! Rick says he has to deal with this issue all the time. Cites the statistic of 40 million abortions per year. At what point does a gestating baby get human rights? (Yay! I'm so glad he asked this question!)

BO: States that deciding when a gestating baby is fully human is "above my pay grade." He's pro-choice, believes in Roe v. Wade -- not because he believes in abortion, but because he doesn't think women make the decision to have an abortion casually. Says the goal should be to reduce the # of abortions.

RW: Has Obama ever voted to limit or reduce the # of abortions?

BO: He's against late-term abortion. If you believe that life begins at conception, he can't argue. But he can say, "Can we work together to reduce the # of unwanted pregnancies?" How do we provide resources that allow a woman to keep a child? (I think these are specious, or at least tertiary questions -- is abortion wrong or not? If wrong, it should be outlawed, plain and simple).

RW: Define marriage.

BO: Marriage is the union between a man and a woman. As a Christian, it's a sacred union. God's in the mix.

RW: Would you support constitutional protection for that definition of marriage?

BO: No. Historically, we haven't defined marriage federally. It's a state issue.

Interrupted by first-born son asking to watch a movie. Actually, he climbed on my head. Hang on...

8:40 p.m.

RW: Define rich.

BO: $150k/yr. down is middle class to poor. $250k/yr. and above is rich. (What about $151k/yr. to $249k/yr?). $150k/yr. and below will see a tax cut under his plan. Asserts again that $250k+/yr. is "rich." (He still hasn't addressed that apparent no-man's land between $150k and $250k/yr. Does he realize that?)

Obama's answers on the purpose of the Supreme Court and which justice he wouldn't nominate were -- well -- strange. It's designed only to limit the power of the chief executive? Huh? What about 9th grade civics -- highest body in the judicial branch, created to interpret and clarify law, and all that? And Barack's assessment of Clarence Thomas was essentially that he is a dunce and therefore unworthy of being on the court. He wouldn't nominate Scalia just because they disagree (what are the nature of those disagreements, Barack?), and he doesn't like the way John Roberts presides over the court because he's too compliant vis-a-vis the Oval Office. Sorry folks, but this is pablum. And he accuses Justice Thomas of thoughtlessness...

RW: There are 148 million orphans in the world. They don't need to be in orphanages. They need to be in families. Would there be a willingness to create an emergency plan for orphans?

BO: Thinks it's a great idea. Wants to work with international organizations. Part of the plan needs to be preventing unwanted children with good health care (my hunch is that this means Planned Parenthood style solutions in Barack speak).

RW: What should we do about religious persecution?

BO: Cites our complex relationship with China -- they're a trading partner, but they are actively engaged in persecuting people of faith. We need to "bear witness" and "speak out." We also need to lead by example. (Ugh. He's turning this into an anti-Gitmo rant. Can we stay on the subject?) We can't talk about religious persecution when Gitmo exists. (Dangblasted moral equivalence at work. As though Gitmo and sending Christians to labor camps are the same thing. Gimme a break.)

RW: Why do you want to be president?

BO: (This is The MonT-SteR's interpretation of what he said.) Basically, we're only great to the degree that we're socialist (disguised cleverly in language of empathy). That's why he wants the office, so he can turn us more in that direction. No thanks, Barack. Just say no to Marx and Lenin.

Next up, McCain's turn. Rather than type out RW's questions, I'm just going to organize it topically.

9:04 p.m.

McCain on Leadership

Wise leaders he'd depend on:

General Patraeus -- great military leader. Took us from defeat to victory.
John Lewis -- (I don't know who this is...)
Meg Whitman -- CEO of eBay.

McCain's greatest moral failure. First marriage. America, throughout her existence, has not always served interest beyond her own, although she's been the best at it in the world.

McCain led against party's interest and his own best interest on climate change, spending, tort reform, etc. The most trying was when he was first in Congress, Reagan wanted to send Marines to Beirut in a peace-keeping mission. He opposed Reagan, and the marines ended up getting bombed.

McCain's most significant reasoned flip-flop: Off-shore drilling. He knows that people disagree, but states that it's a national security issue. We're sending $700 billion to parties in the world who don't have our best interests at heart. We can't allow that. We need to have a multi-faceted, broad-based approach to energy policy and reform.

Most gut-wrenching decision: When McCain was in prison camp. Was going to be released, but refused. Was the toughest decision he made. Took lots of prayer.

Next up, worldview issues.

McCain on Worldview

Talks about his faith. Mentions salvation and forgiveness through Christ in about four words, seems very uncomfortable. Mentions that Christian faith embraces the world. (Hope that is a confession of mankind's universal need for Christ rather than theological universalism....) Falls into a story about Christmas in his POW camp, how when he was allowed to stand outside his cell on Christmas day, a guard came and drew a cross in the dirt. It was a special moment when enemy combatants were merely two Christians joining in worship in a dark place.

Abortion -- McCain states that a baby has human rights at the moment of conception. Has a 25-year pro-life record. Will be a pro-life president with pro-life policies.

Marriage -- Union between one man and one woman. People can enter into legal agreements and so forth (parallel to Obama's support for civil unions). If the courts attempted to force unilateral recognition of same-sex marriage, at that point McCain supports a Constitutional amendment.

Stem cells -- very great struggle and dilemma for the pro-life community. McCain wants stem cell research, but very optimistic about adult stem cell research. As it progresses, the debate will be moot.

Does evil exist? Yes -- it needs to be defeated. He's going to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice. Transcendent battle of the 21st century is the struggle between the West and extremist, radical Islam. It is palpably evil and must be defeated.

McCain says he would not have nominated Ginsburg, Breyer, Souter, and Stevens. President's responsibility is great. Nomination should be based on proven record and constitutional perspective (not legislating from the bench). Proud of Bush for nominating Roberts and Alito.

On faith-based organizations: Can faith-based organizations hire those who adhere to their belief system? (Barack felt that they could not if receiving federal funds.) McCain says yes -- to require otherwise is to cripple the organization itself.

Education -- should there be merit pay for the best teachers? Yes. Choice and competition is the solution. Vouchers work. Home schooling works (yes!). Charter schools work. Choice and competition is a simple solution, but it has the potential to reform our education system. This is the civil rights issue of the 21st century -- sending children to failing schools is unjust.

Taxation -- McCain's wants everybody to get wealthy. Doesn't believe in taking the money of the rich. Small business owners work hard, and are classified as rich. But raising taxes on them would be onerous and damage the economy. Jokes that $5 million/yr. is the cut-off for "rich," and acknowledges that he's probably going to be taken out of context for that comment. Joked sardonically about spending $3 million of federal money on a DNA study of bears in Montana -- was that a paternity issue or a criminal issue? It's funny, but it isn't. During hard economic times, that kind of spending should be eradicated.

When our right to privacy and national security collide, what takes precedence? Mentions right to privacy with respect to union ballots (to eliminate intimidation). (Mm. McCain's answer is rambling here. Nothing substantive -- he's ranting about political infighting. Acknowledges the tension, but doesn't present any solutions or coherent method of handling the question RW put to him. Sorry Sen. McCain, you blew it on this one....)

Commercial break -- I have to say thus far that I've found McCain far more substantive. He got stiff when he talked about his own faith life and what Christianity means to him (I think that makes him uncomfortable). Obama was far more comfortable discussing his faith. But Obama really is all about feel-good fluff. So far, McCain is (for the most part) giving more cogent answers. Honestly, I wasn't expecting that.

9:40 p.m.

McCain on America's Responsibility to the World

Freedom is worth dying for. There is a lot of pain and suffering in the world, so we can't possibly remedy everything. America's most precious commodity is her blood. We've shed our blood for others in a way no other nation has. Just as we defeated communism, we can defeat radical Islam. RW asks when we should intervene in situations like Darfour, Georgia, etc. McCain says that we need to stop genocide whenever we can (but particularly when it's in the interest of our national security). We need to marshal world forces. RW mentions that Russia is reasserting itself in Georgia and Poland, asks McCain to comment. He mentions the bloodshed and suffering, saddened by Russia's behavior. Mentions that Georgia was one of the earliest Christian nations. Georgian President was educated in the U.S., returned to forge a successful democracy. We need to not only negotiate a cease-fire, but insist that Georgia's territorial integrity be respected. It wasn't an accident that the presidents of other former Eastern Bloc countries flew to Georgia to show solidarity. This conflict is also about Russian control over energy. We need to send a message to the Russians that such behavior is not acceptable. (Unfortunately, McCain doesn't outline quite what that message should be beyond angry denunciations. A little fluff here....)

On religious persecution -- use the bully pulpit. Cites Reagan's example (he called the Soviets the evil empire, called upon them to tear down the Berlin wall). Judeo-Christian principles dictate that we help the oppressed in the world. Knows first-hand the price and preciousness of freedom.

Why he wants to be President: Wants to inspire a generation of Americans to serve a cause greater than themselves. Time to unify the country. America wants hope and optimism. Wants people who won't vote for him to know that he'll be their president as well.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

MonT-SteR Cookin'

2008-07-19T23:53:00.003-04:00

I just made my own guacamole for the first time based on a recipe by Dr. John La Puma. I customized it considerably for my own tastes, so I'm claiming this recipe as my own.

MonT-SteR Guacamole

Ingredients

3 avocados
2 small tomatillos
Half a small onion, finely chopped
1 tsp minced garlic
2 Serrano chile peppers
1 Roma tomato, diced
1-2 tsps each of lemon and lime juice
1 tbsp of sour cream
Salt to taste

Directions

Mash up the avocados until they're a nice green paste (yucky visual, I know).
Add the onion, garlic, tomato, and tomatillo.
Cut the chile peppers in half from top to bottom. Then, take a spoon and scoop out the seeds (this will reduce their spiciness a good bit -- thanks to Dr. La Puma for this tip). Mince the peppers and add to mixture.
Add the sour cream, and the lemon and lime juice. Salt to taste. Stir thoroughly.

Enjoy on tortilla chips, as a sandwich spread (especially on a deli-sliced turkey sandwich with brown mustard -- YUM!), or as a vegetable dip.

Let me know what you think!

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

RIP, Tony Snow

2008-07-12T16:11:00.014-04:00

I was very sad to learn this afternoon that Tony Snow -- journalist, commentator, news anchor, radio host, musician, intellectual, public servant, and family man -- died of cancer early this morning at 2 a.m.

He was one of a kind in politics. Friends and colleagues have labeled him something of a renaissance man, which he certainly was; just look at all the roles he fulfilled and how expertly he discharged them. He's credited (however begrudgingly by some) with changing the culture of the White House press corps during his short tenure as press secretary.

How?

I first heard Tony Snow on talk radio, and I was impressed with the breadth of his knowledge, as well as his eloquence and erudition on the fly. I always found him very stimulating to listen to. But his unique way with contentious callers was even more impressive. It didn't matter how stridently they disagreed or how vehemently (or insultingly) they argued, Tony had a cool head that just didn't get rattled. Even when he was hard-hitting in his rejoinder to an interlocutor, there was an undeniable kindheartedness that came through -- so much so that my wife, who doesn't really like political theater or commentary, would say, "Tony's a good guy," and gladly listen to him. I suspect that his ideological polar opposites found themselves doing much the same thing in spite of themselves.

"Civility in political discourse" is reverently and longingly bandied about a great deal these days, usually in association with a call to "bipartisanship" -- a political cuss word that, in today's climate, means ideological compromise for one side of the aisle and not the other. Tony Snow embodied civility in political discourse, and he proved that it can be done without sacrificing core principles.

Others have spoken of him as a man of deep faith, which was doubtless the reservoir of his gentility. I remember a mailbag segment on FoxNews Sunday featuring a viewer's scathing attack on Tony's belief in the resurrection of Christ, likening it to belief in Xenu and the Easter Bunny. Tony's response was rendered in unabashed fashion, but with a kindly smile: "Atheistic jabs notwithstanding, yes, I believe!"

It seems fitting, therefore, to close with some of Tony Snow's own words from a Christianity Today article about reconciling the faith that so guided and informed his life and the disease he finally succumbed to this morning:

Picture yourself in a hospital bed. The fog of anesthesia has begun to wear away. A doctor stands at your feet; a loved one holds your hand at the side. "It's cancer," the healer announces.

The natural reaction is to turn to God and ask him to serve as a cosmic Santa. "Dear God, make it all go away. Make everything simpler." But another voice whispers: "You have been called." Your quandary has drawn you closer to God, closer to those you love, closer to the issues that matter—and has dragged into insignificance the banal concerns that occupy our "normal time."

The moment you enter the Valley of the Shadow of Death, things change. You discover that Christianity is not something doughy, passive, pious, and soft. Faith may be the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. But it also draws you into a world shorn of fearful caution. The life of belief teems with thrills, boldness, danger, shocks, reversals, triumphs, and epiphanies. Think of Paul, traipsing though the known world and contemplating trips to what must have seemed the antipodes (Spain), shaking the dust from his sandals, worrying not about the morrow, but only about the moment.

There's nothing wilder than a life of humble virtue -- for it is through selflessness and service that God wrings from our bodies and spirits the most we ever could give, the most we ever could offer, and the most we ever could do.

Farewell, Tony. Your heart, intellect, and aplomb endeared you to so many; among public figures on the scene today, you really were one of my heroes. Thanks for giving the most you ever could offer to God and man. You will be sorely missed.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

They're playing my song...

2008-05-23T08:32:00.000-04:00

Stumbled across this late last night, and wanted to share. I've always regarded this to be one of the most beautiful, soulful Christian songs written in more modern times.

Your Love Broke Through - Keith Green

There was nobody like Keith Green...

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

His Eyes

2008-05-22T01:21:00.004-04:00

That is the title and refrain of a Steven Curtis Chapman song that has ministered to me deeply over the years.

Some of the lyrics I love most:

Sometimes His voice comes calling
Like rolling thunder
Or like driving rain
And sometimes His voice is quiet
And we start to wonder
If He knows our pain
But He who spoke peace to the water
Cares more for our hearts than the waves

In the days ahead, the Chapman family will need to abide in the conviction that God does indeed quell storms and quiet hearts. I saw a late-breaking story tonight describing how their youngest adopted daughter was struck and killed by an SUV that was being driven by an older brother. It all happened in their driveway and, from what I've read, the whole family witnessed the horrific event.

Please keep them in prayer. My own prayer is that, amidst their grief, they are aware of His eyes, His hands, His comforting touch upon them.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Lost and found, dadgum it!

2008-04-29T00:19:00.004-04:00

I'm in the process of sending out a birth announcement I made for my new son (you can see it here), and so I'm searching for the e-mail addresses of some long lost friends.

One such friend is my college roommate, Evan Price, who was lead violinist for the Grammy-winning Turtle Island String Quartet, and now plays with the Hot Club of San Francisco. In the process of looking for his e-mail address, I stumbled upon this article at NPR's Web site.

It turns out that Evan lost his violin a few years back by leaving it on the curb at the airport. As a former bassoonist whose axe was badly damaged one day by a wayward restroom door (I'll tell the full story another time), I can imagine how devastating this was for Evan. Unfortunately, concert obligations didn't allow him much time to grieve; Evan was forced to find another instrument, pronto. Eight months and one police sting operation later, however, his long lost violin was miraculously recovered.

You'd think that would be a "happily ever after" ending to the story, but it presented a sticky dilemma for Evan. Check out the article.

Just a fun little tidbit of trivia I thought I'd share...

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Introducing Baby MonT-SteR #2

2008-04-24T11:48:00.011-04:00

Here, friends, is the true reason for the recent dearth of postage on the MonT-SteR REPORT. I am a daddy all over again.

Our second son, Mark Christian Monti was born on Wednesday, April 16, 2008 at 8:11 a.m. He weighed 8 lbs. 7 oz. and measured 21 in. long at birth.

Christi was nothing short of magnificent. Due to some complications, our first son (Robert) was born by c-section. Christi's goal was to deliver Mark naturally, but finding an OB/GYN practice that would allow a VBAC (Vaginal Birth After Caesarean) was tough. We eventually found one, and although they labeled Christi's pregnancy high-risk from the start (and made no pretense about their skepticism with regard to Christi's ability to deliver Mark naturally), she never wavered. Her labor was very intense and painful due to the fact that she had both back and front labor, but she persevered.

I married an amazing woman. And now we have an amazing family of four. I have two, count 'em, TWO sons, and I couldn't be happier.

Thank you, Jesus, for showing your grace and faithfulness to our family again.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Heretics and Bullies

2008-03-27T20:56:00.010-04:00

I have a number of thoughts I plan to share on Oprah's latest foray into the nether regions of false religion, but that'll have to wait. All I'll say for now is that, in her enthusiasm for the next johnny-come-lately New Age guru, she's leading a lot of people astray. More on that later.

Today, while doing some research, I stumbled across Jodee Blanco's Web site. Ms. Blanco was on the receiving end of some extremely ruthless, savage bullying as a high school student. She recounts gut-wrenching stories of being beaten, pelted with rocks, having snow stuffed in her mouth until she gagged, and other such horrors -- all experienced on an unrelenting basis at the cruel hand of fellow students. Her experiences led her to write an anti-bullying curriculum for schools, entitled It's Not Just Joking Around. According to Ms. Blanco, her anti-bullying campaign prevented sixteen bullying-related suicides, a school bombing, and a stabbing in its first year alone.

I'm very glad to see Blanco's campaign, organization, and books succeed. Bullying is a blight on our nation's schools, and it shouldn't be tolerated by teachers, parents, or students -- ever.

"Gee, Rob," you say, "isn't bullying a bit off the beaten path for you? Why are you writing about this?"

Because I was a victim of bullying as well. Not just an isolated instance here and there, but consistent and merciless bullying that continued for the better part of my 7th grade year. Nothing as extreme as what Jodee Blanco experienced, but it made bus rides to and from school a miserable experience. And since I felt both likable and generally well liked throughout my elementary school years, the experience of being bullied was a huge shock to my psyche.

At the back of the bus were some guys who decided I made a good torture subject. In some ways I suppose I was; although I had gotten in some scraps as a kid, I wasn't particularly adept at fighting (despite the fact that I was nearly my present height of 6'2" by the time I was twelve). Moreover, I didn't really want to fight with anybody -- getting along was just simpler and more fun. I imagine that they instinctively knew I was unlikely to fight back.

In any case, an 8th grader I knew from elementary school had always been friendly before. But now, he threatened to beat me up on a daily basis, showering me with expletive-laced insults. I was flummoxed by the intense anger and hostility he exhibited and just didn't know how to deal with it -- to my knowledge, I had never wronged him or given him cause to dislike me. I suspect it served him somehow in terms of image enhancement to jump on the Rob pig pile like everyone else.

Then there were the guys on the back of the bus who loved to flick my ears, punch my arms, steal my belongings, and give me wedgies that were so bad I swore I could feel my underwear in my throat. I know, it sounds relatively innocuous in the grand scheme of things, but the humiliation of it all was significant at the time. I did everything I could to avoid the back of the bus, but the other kids were not very helpful. When the bus was full, most of them were unwilling to let me sit in a seat with them. I would go from seat to seat trying to negotiate a place well forward, only to be met with flat refusals to scoot over and make room. Before long, the bus driver would be hollering at me to hurry up and sit down (why he never stopped the bullies, I'll never know), and there were plenty of times that I would have no choice but to fall into the arms of my tormenters.

At school, there were threats and insults from the people I sat in band with. I was overweight, so they thought it was amusing to suggest I wore a bra. One of them decided it would be fun to beat me up, and on the way to lunch one day he shadowed my every step, punching away. Since this aggressive kid was something of a pip-squeak, his blows didn't really hurt physically, but when we passed someone in the hall and they cheered him on -- that definitely hurt inside. On top of it all, this same pip-squeak bragged to everyone he could that he had thrashed me, which only brought more disdain.

I shan't bore you with additional stories, but suffice it to say that my middle school experience was punctuated by innumerable instances like these. Looking back, my daily existence was rife with inner pain and desperation. I wasn't friendless by any means, but I lived in abject fear that the friends I had would desert me if they witnessed me getting bullied. And somehow, my sense of value and identity got entirely wrapped up in who I was friends with and how popular I was with them. It's a frightening prospect to have your fragile sense of value and utility determined by the fickle and fleeting predilections of a bunch of pre-teens. The pressure of procuring their favor while fending off bullies was too much to bear at times, and so I have the distinct memory of walking from class to class in a self-induced mental and emotional stupor -- checked out, numb, withdrawn.

My grades tanked as a result, to the bewilderment of my parents. They were oblivious to what I was going through, and I was too ashamed to tell them about it. Report card days were full of dread and self-hatred. I'd be angry at myself for getting D's, and once my parents got over their own shock and anger at my poor academic performance, they would sit me down and attempt to ferret out what had gone haywire in their boy's brain. Of course, I didn't understand what was going on myself, so these conversations usually went like this:

"Robbie, you know it's important to get good grades and work hard at school, don't you?"

"Yes."

"And you know you're a very smart, very capable boy. Right?"

"Yes."

"You could get straight A's if you wanted to."

"I know."

"Then why are you getting D's?"

"I don't know."

I can only imagine how frustrating these conversations must have been for my parents. I genuinely felt bad about not being able to give them better answers, but I was being honest. I really didn't know what to tell them. It was only after being introduced to healing ministry paradigms in recent years that I was able to piece together what happened -- and to sort out how the darkness of my middle school years still affected me as an adult.

And that brings me to the point of all this. It's cathartic to just to share this information, but I need to note something important. Looking back, I have been amazed that I didn't thoroughly self-destruct during my early teenage years. It would have been such an easy thing to seek solace and acceptance by falling in with "the wrong crowd." How did I avoid getting enticed by the drug and alcohol abuse that were commonplace among my peers?

I recall a day when the weight of all I endured each day was too much. When I got home from school, I ran upstairs to my room, closed the door, and proceeded to weep. For a time I just sobbed, and then, through my tears, I began to talk to God. Every last bit of grief, pain, anger, and confusion came gushing out. Why, God? Why do these boys on the bus take such pleasure in my pain and embarrassment? Why am I going through this? How did this happen to me? What did I do to deserve all this?

I didn't get any answers, but after that day I came away with two convictions that could only have been experientially rooted. My nascent spirituality lacked the depth or sophistication to contrive or give voice to these convictions, but they were engraved on my heart nevertheless: God was listening intently as I told Him of my pain, and He had drawn near to me in genuine care and concern for my plight. Psalm 34:18 puts it this way:

The LORD is near to the brokenhearted, and saves the crushed in spirit (RSV).

But for this living truth finding expression in one of the deepest moments of pain I've ever had, I shudder to think of the darkness I could have fallen into as a kid. God simply preserved me by His gracious hand.

If you've been bullied or are being bullied now and you're reading this, your pain doesn't go unnoticed by Heaven. And you need to know that there is no ally or friend like Jesus Christ. I'd welcome the opportunity to pray for you or help in any way I can. Just shoot me an e-mail.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

Primary encounter

2008-02-12T22:59:00.004-05:00

While crossing the parking lot to enter my local polling place today, I saw a man talking on his cell phone. He looked visibly distraught; his hand was cupped over his eyes as he stood. As I got closer, he cried out in anguish and dropped to one knee, all the while holding the phone to his ear.

I paused as I opened the door, watching him. He was obviously deeply pained by something—it seemed he was getting terrible news of some kind. My heart went out to him, but I wasn't sure what to do. Do I talk to him, or would that be viewed as an intrusion in a moment of private grief? Then again, his grief didn't appear to be all that private at the moment. It was severe enough to be arresting; he couldn't even make it to his car.

Not sure what action to take (if any), I went inside. This public mourner had caught the attention of the poll workers inside.

"Is he okay?" one of them asked me as I handed over my voter registration card.

"I don't know," I replied. "It sure seems like he's getting some bad news."

A couple people continued to watch through the window, as did I. He still hadn't moved on. There, on the sidewalk outside the polling place, he continued to kneel, hand over his eyes and head bowed.

I'm going to do something, I thought. So I voted as hastily as I could, accepted an "I Voted" sticker on my way out the door, and walked up to the man.

"Excuse me, sir," I said as I put my hand on his arm. "I know you're on the phone, and I don't mean to interrupt, but is there anything I can do for you?"

He looked at me with bleary, reddened eyes.

"There's been a death—" He was so choked with grief that he couldn't even finish the sentence.

"I'm so sorry," I said. "What's your name?"

"Rhett."

"Rhett, can I pray for you?"

He nodded his head.

"Can I ask who died?" I said.

At this, he simply burst into tears. And there, in the parking lot at the polling place, I prayed with all the fervency and empathy I could muster. I asked the God of all comfort, the same God who knows what it is to suffer loss and even death, to draw near to Rhett and his family. I prayed that, despite their grief, they would know the surpassing peace that only God can grant us in times of personal pain. I ended by speaking blessing over him, and by giving him a hug. He thanked me, and—after taking a moment to compose himself—went inside to vote.

I drove away from the polling place in tears, saddened the loss that Rhett was feeling. I continued to pray for him as I drove, and then it hit me: Does he have a church family? Is he part of a community that will close ranks around him and bear his burdens during this time? Rob, for goodness' sake, you're a pastor! Go offer further ministry to him, and invite him into your own faith-community!

I turned the car around, but by the time I got back to the polling place, he was gone.

As I shared this encounter with my wife, I did some weeping of my own. While it was a joy and a privilege to be able to offer the simple comfort of a caring voice, a heartfelt prayer, and a hug, I could have done so much more. I was just a little too slow on the uptake.

Next time, I pray that I have the presence of mind and spirit to do a more appropriate level of follow-through in a situation like that. In the meantime, friends, I invite you to pray for Rhett and his family.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR

A question of questionable focus

2008-02-10T23:23:00.001-05:00

Our senior pastor preached a very stimulating message today about bearing one another's burdens (see Galatians 6:2).

In a nutshell, he talked about how Christians often pride themselves on how they don't "drink, smoke, chew, or hang out with those who do." There's an indignation we sometimes feel at the more flagrant sorts of sin that are, shall we say, more colloquial in nature.

Our pastor then posed the following questions:

How often do those of us who are so very proud of our abstinence from alcohol, tobacco, movies, etc. "fulfill the law of Christ" by bearing the burdens of others?
If the answer is infrequently, then why is that sin of omission somehow less execrable or more tolerable than more banal forms of carnality?

Tough questions.

As I read the Gospels, Jesus reserved the most stinging rebuke not for the likes of prostitutes or even swindlers like Zaccheus, but the self-righteous prigs of the religious establishment who were high on their own asceticism.

Pharasaism is no substitute for Christlikeness.

Blessings,

Rob
aka The MonT-SteR