...an even keel.

The Sonlight Forums are down for maintenance for a couple of days. And from what I've heard, that may be a good thing.

Sonlight Forums Maintenance

See, in case you hadn't realized it, it's time for some campaignin' in these here good ol' United States. And, for some reason, people get all fired up this time of leap year*.

And when you get people fired up, they sometimes say stuff that isn't, well, calm, cool, or collected. And if you have a moderated community, sometimes the loving thing to do is censor those who won't do so themselves.

But this can lead to upset people. One of the Sonlight customer support representatives told me today, "It's not every day that I hear people say that Sonlight is a communist company."

With all that in mind, let's turn to Sussane's post about unity. Her post is mostly about denominationalism** and how that leads to a refusal even to pray together. And I agree: That's not good.

But...

[and you knew that was coming because, otherwise, it would merely be another "post of note"]

...there is something powerful in all these denominations. Denominations allow people to experience God in a way that is more meaningful to them. And just like the various cultures worldwide that worship God in their culturally appropriate way, so denominations within the US allow each of us to worship God in a way that is suitable to our culture. I don't get much out of liturgy, but I know my "flavor" of worship isn't for everyone.

So, I'm against denominationalism--the tendency to think that you're right and everyone else is wrong to the point of rejection of people--just as I am against flame wars in politics. But I'm very happy for denominations--the opportunity to work within the framework that makes the most sense to you--just as I am happy that we have more than one political party. ...of course, I wish we had a few more viable options for those <smile>.

I do pray and long for unity, but we won't get there by "making everyone the same." Communism doesn't work. And I'm glad I'm not involved with a communist company, even if we do ask people to play nice.

Flame Wars

Are you playing nice, even if you don't agree with others (especially members of the Body)? I hope I am, while maintaining a meaningful stand for what is good, right, and true.

~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

*The good news is that we have an extra day of campaigning to do! ...wait... is that good?

**Though, from my many chats with Mormon missionaries, I wouldn't list Mormonism as a Christian denomination. And when my missionary friends object, I clarify "oxthordox Christian" because, at some point, we get to disagreeing on the majors.

Title:
Tricia

I'm a bad blogger.

I also question my abilities as a filmmaker after seeing Mary Grace's video. Grr!

...where was I? Oh, right:

I'm a bad blogger because I saw an image today on a person's blog, and I can't remember who it was now and I didn't write it down. So, I'm sorry, person.

The image on someone's sidebar was of a gun with the caption: Would it bother us more if they used guns? abort73.com

Point well taken.

How would people respond if, for a partial birth abortion, the doctor pulled out an HK USP Compact 9mm [NB: Link contains mild profanity] and shot the fetus through the mass of cells students would be inclined to label "the head" on an anatomy lab?

*****

But what of the other side?

Images/presentations/sound-bytes are an artwork all their own and can highly affect how we approach a topic. So what have the Pro-Choicers come up with? How about the slogan:

77% of anti-abortion leaders are men. 100% of them will never be pregnant. It's your body. It's your decision. found here

Two Sides

And so we stand on a precipice: Basic human rights--the freedom to live--in question.

For the pro-choicers it's a question of being allowed to live your life, the freedom to do as you please without [ignorant] others imposing their beliefs on you.

For pro-lifers it's a question of being allowed to have a shot at life at all, without murders snuffing you out.

This is not the place--nor do I want to become such--to debate the merit or lack thereof of either side. This post is aimed at reminding us, to the point of being acutely aware, of how far we polarize each other when we step off the cliff: Murderer. Tyrant. Sinner. Slaver.

The whole debate turns on the question: Is a fetus a child?

If a fetus is a child, then, yes, it would be like pulling a gun on a baby.

If a fetus is not a child, then, yes, those men are simply trying to hold women down... or worse.

Until we agree, neither side is going to convince the other, and pictures like the ones above will only push the other side off their precipice while preaching to our choir.

Is that what we want to do?

Is that what we should do?

...but what else can we do, considering this is a question of life or death (potentially for women and children)?

~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

Stereotypes exist.

And that's not a bad thing. Stereotypes allow us to quickly categorize the world, have a rough understanding of something, and know how we should interact in a particular situation. Without stereotypes we would have to rediscover social graces for each and every person, situation, or experience we have.

At the same time, stereotypes aren't a perfect picture of others. Our assumptions can be very wrong. And that is why people often urge us to not judge each other based on our appearance.

That's fair. But not judging by appearance carries a lot of dangers. There's a quote from the movie "Crash" that I found particularly fascinating: Two young African Americans are walking down a mildly busy street at night. One of them remarks to the other about how everyone seemed to be scared of them. "But why," he asks, "are we not afraid of them?"

"Because we're the only ones packing heat?" The other ventures.

"Exactly." And with that, they pull out their guns and steal another character's car.

If you dress like a hoodlum, you should not be surprised that people assume that you are. Just like the movies of old: If you're wearing black and a mask, you're the bad guy.

Similarly, if your garments match those of the homeschool stereotype, don't be surprised if people look at you like you're from Planet Homeschool. You are, and you're promoting it. The stereotype exists for a reason.

On the other hand, it's not totally accurate, which is why we often have people say, "You homeschool? But you seem so normal."

What got me on this train of thought?

I got an email from Jenny about an article in the Wall Street Journal. She also posted about the article on her blog. The article talks about how churches pay "mystery worshipers" to pose as first time guests and then write up reports about what was good, what was bad, and what was ugly--everything from how stocked the toilet paper was to the quality of the exegesis.

Jenny--hello, friend!--points out, with some disdain, that churches are dumping money into this kind of thing. She also takes issue with the guy who has a "cover story" [read: lie] just in case someone asks him what he's up to. But that's a topic for another day.

The fact that churches (the business entity) spends money on "market research" like this raises a question: How important is our appearance?

I know there are believers who feel that there shouldn't even be a church "entity" or building. On the other end of the spectrum, we have people who split their church over the color of the new carpeting.

For me, I guess I look at it from the perspective of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs:

Luke's Hierarchy of Needs

For a church to exist, it first needs believers who will gather. Then it needs a place to do so (be it a home, a field, a cave). After that, small groups and areas of involvement are needed so people can feel like they are an integral part of the congregation and can expand the reach of the ministry. And once you have all those things in place, then people can start to complain about burnt out light bulbs and the temperature of the room.

And, yes, it may be petty and not nearly as important as, say, what a newly founded church in India is struggling with, but...

...wait, scratch that.

Doesn't Maslow's Hierarchy tell us that, for those at the upper levels, those things are what's important?

In other words: Our appearance in the Western American church is super important.

Should it be?

I guess that depends on who you are trying to reach. But when was the last time you were happy to sit in a service that was freezing or burning hot? How well could you focus?

Even so, I do agree with Jenny: It would be nice if people got a servant's heart and a desire to love others so churches wouldn't have to pay someone to come tell them that they aren't. But, I don't know about your church, but for mine there are the few who do everything, and most everyone else merely shows up for the service, not to be of service.

So as you look at your appearance: How important is it?

~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

Sorry this was so long. Too many ideas spoil the post.

Many thoughts buzzing
All around inside my head.
Will try to make sense.

Bad Haiku
Luke 10/17/08

I've heard the following sentiment multiple times recently: The church just wants my money, so I don't go anymore. They're a business, not about relationship or life change.

I once heard a speaker at camp say: In that case, you should not go to a baseball game, or buy a car, or spend money on food because all they want is your money.

But, yes, the church as an institution is a non-profit organization--a business. Sonlight is a for-profit organization--a business. The same is true of Zondervan, Fireproof, and even Mission India... they all want your money.

The operable word here, then, is just. Is money the only thing that the church is about? Is that the only thing that Sonlight, or your local bookstore, is about? How about Amazon? Your bank? The government?

I can assure you that all of those entities want your money (some will take it, regardless). But what do they do with that money? I don't know what Amazon does with it, but I know what Sonlight does with much of the money. The same is true of your church: You should be able to see what they are spending the money on. As a non-profit, they are required to have open books.

But even if your church, as an entity, only wanted your money, is that wrong? Is church, the institution, why we attend on Sundays?

No.

We visit the church, the entity's building, so we can participate in church, the gathering of believers. And we participate in church, the gathering, so that we, as a church, can bond, grow, and minister. If your ministry (the third definition of church) was only about money, you have a problem. If the church gathering is only about money, you have a problem. But if the entity that makes the other two possible is only about money, I don't think that's wrong. ...because, honestly, the entity is about making the other two possible through the money.

Which brings us to the clincher:

You.

I'm currently growing in the area of giving, and I have a long way to go, but I hope to one day be as generous as my parents.

Why do you want money? It's certainly not just to have it. And if you aren't using the resources you have--be it money, talents, or connections--are you really about life change and relationships? Because the only way that church (the ministry) is going to be about those things if you, a member of the church (gathering), make it so.

Sobering thoughts.

 ~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

I love to read glowing responses to Sonlight. I try to include them in the "Other Posts of Note" section. And that makes sense: I'm a Sonlight blogger, a Sonlight kid, and soon to be--I hope--a Sonlight dad.

But I love the negative posts about Sonlight too.

Well, I don't really love them. In fact, it's hard to hear someone berate the company or one of the products. But I love what I get to do. My job, which I really enjoy, is to chat with those disgruntled folks and find out what went wrong, what they didn't like, and do what I can to make the situation right or, at least, better. I get to help people, and I love helping people.

Granted, if you look back through the history of "Other Posts of Note"--and you should because there is some great stuff there--you won't find me linking to the person who complained about the quality of the binding on one of the Sonlight titles. I don't instantly share that someone says our materials are evil. I don't include the post where the person complained about our shoddy offerings in this or that subject.

But I do, from time to time, post the followup.

I don't want to link you to a post where someone has merely complained. I am, however, thrilled when I am able to link to a post where people have complained, I have been able to address their concerns--in however minimal a way--and they feel that they have at least been heard and supported. In fact, in many cases, their issue remains, but I have, hopefully, been able to take their feedback to improve Sonlight and encouraged them to continue on in the homeschooling journey (even if it isn't with Sonlight).

I love those kinds of posts.

And I got to thinking about it today because I had one of both kinds--included with the "Other Posts of Note" <smile>:

Mary Grace's positive and Suji's negative ...okay, it's really a rave review of how great I am <cough cough>. You think I'd link to someone calling me names? <grin>

I write about Sonlight's desire to help homeschooling families often, but that's because I think it is so important--and so much a part of who I am and what I do. I know that Sonlight isn't perfect, and so I welcome feedback on how we can make it better. And I'm glad that people are happy with me when I do.

It's one of the great perks of the job.

I just wish I didn't have so many typos. I even proofread most of my comments! <grr>

~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

Today is the annual Sonlight "Refresher," so I have to get ready to film it in a moment. The "Refresher" is a time when we get together and hear the story of Sonlight and get reminded of what we are all about: Helping families (especially missionaries) by making it easier and more enjoyable for them to homeschool their children. ...of course, I film the refresher every year and we have yet to do anything with the footage. Maybe someday posterity will want to see it. Or perhaps, sometime in the future, I'll get to make something cool to post here.

<switching gears>

I'm not feeling very ponderous today--though Brittany's mom once said that she was, much to the amusement of her family--even so, my mind has been pondering a few things. Most recently, and notably, a post by Cherish.

I've come to enjoy Cherish's posts, as well as her personality and ways of looking at things... not to mention her physics lessons. <smile>

Her post, which I strongly suggest you read instead of relying on my truncated version, is in response to a call to pray and fast for the stop of abortion. Her argument is basically thus:

[This is] in no way even a small step toward a real solution. ...they're doing absolutely nothing of practical value that will in actuality reduce the problem. ...It's a scam. It's snake oil. It deprives people who may have a sincere and earnest desire to do some good of the opportunity to... do something which could truly be useful.

Ouch.

And, by and large, I agree with her.

Granted, I do believe in the importance of prayer both for our own edification--which she acknowledges--as well as the world change it can bring about. So, I'm not knocking the prayer and fasting. That is super important. But her point remains searingly (and searchingly) true: Faith without works is dead.

In fact, read all of James 2.

If these people are merely praying and doing nothing more--like loving and caring for these girls, offering help and support--there is little value to praying and fasting, because, as James 2 points out: Are you even really acting out in faith if you aren't also actively doing something to help the problem in the real world?

So, yes, Cherish, you've just giving an excellent example of the truth of Scripture <smile>. Right on.

On the other hand, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be praying as well. We simply should be doing both. Which reminds me of another passage...

~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father

I firmly believe that, as people, we need to be loving. We need to do that. The world is just not a good place when people stop loving others.

I don't think I'd get many complaints about that.

But I'm not so sure that it's a good idea to be accepting. Loving? Yes. Accepting? No.

Huh? Isn't that the same thing?

Nope. Not at all.

Loving means, roughly, to want what is best for others, to care about them, to treat them well, and to encourage them to live the best possible life and provide what you can to make that happen. Accepting, on the hand, means that you merely tolerate the follies of others, you allow them to do whatever they like, and you generally disregard them except to smile wanly at them from time to time. If you try to accept everyone you eventually come to the point where you have to agree with the self-refuting ideal of "not tolerating intolerance." We simply cannot maintain a rational existence and work toward acceptance of everyone.

The opposite is true of love. If we truly love others, we can function very well as a society, despite being completely "intolerant" of other views. If we truly loved the religious nuts who berate us for our sin, we would be able to smile at them, disagree with them, and treat them well anyway.

The same is true of homosexuals, pro-choicers, fallen pastors/priests, rapists, and hypocrites like me. Love them, but please, please realize the importance of disagreeing with them. But as you disagree and refuse to accept their stance, please remember to love them.

I've been slowly collecting posts on this topic, and I think this distinction will correct and inform every single one of these posts (all of them fascinating reads... just please keep this post in mind):

• Exclusively Inclusive
  
  Alasandra
• Problems with legalized same-sex marriage
• Homosexuality in Culture
• You see a woman being raped
  
  Deb

Remember: Until we learn to love people they have a legitimate complaint against us when we come down of them for their beliefs (be it for completely pagan or truly "holy" perspectives). By the same token, we can never truly accept all people--it's impossible.

So strive so as to live with love toward all, and acceptance of only what is right.

~Luke Holzmann
Filmmaker, Writer, Expectant Father