Just recently my fellow "holder of shiny things" at church, Cody, posted an article about church unity on his blog.

Specifically, he asks what it would be like to hear Christ say, "My love has betrayed Me, My love has left Me, My love does not love Me." More than painful, obviously. But that is exactly what we do, he says, when we split ourselves up along denominational lines, to the point of exclusion. I quote:

"The gift of grace could never be more prominent when you think about how we break his heart as He watches the collective love of His Body fade and fragment. Christians not allowed to commune with each other because they are not this or that, not holy enough, too Catholic, too Protestant, not Orthodox enough, not saved, etc."

A friend of mine recently commented about how ironic it was that our little circle of friends tended to be more divided by our faith - rather than unified - because we all belonged to different denominations and churches. And so on any given Sunday, a day when we as friends could actually spend time together, we all had separate duties that kept us apart. Of course, the great thing in all of this is that we are friends, despite our theological differences and we can get together to worship and glorify God together. But the fact still remains, we do attend different churches because of our theological differences, even though we worship the same God.

The July 2005 edition of Christianity Today had an article entitled "Jack Hayford: the Pentecostal Gold Standard" Hayford has been a pastor for 50 years, and the success of his ministry comes from a focus on worship.

Early in his career, when his church numbered only 18 members, Hayford drove by one of the successful churches – not of his own denomination - in his town, and God gave him an incredibly strong feeling of love for this church, and the work that God was doing there. As he drove by other churches God continued to pour out this love for them. Of interesting note, however, is when Hayford drove by the local Catholic church. Because of his upbringing, he had it ingrained in him that Catholics were not true Christians, but as he drove by, God impressed upon him the fact that here too He was worshipped. Why not, since Christ's blood was shed on the altar every week.

So why the focus on worship? Because worship signifies that we stand among the multitude of believers and heavenly creatures and praise the only true God. In worship there is no room for theological or cultural differences - there is only unity in praise. In worship there is only one focus & a united focus brings a united people. Hayford believes in pushing the boundaries of how people worship because the end result is simple simple submission to God, and a clarity of the purpose of worship. From that standpoint we can truly begin to understand the full nature of the Love that binds us together.
Newly elected Pope Benedict XVI has called for unity in the church and promises to work toward it. Hayford, though a denominational leader, strives for it. My own denomination seeks it. My priest strives for it.

The church is you and me. The church is only as strong as our bond to one another. And our bond to one another is only as strong as our bond to Christ. And our bond to Christ is evident in how we worship with others. When we worship with those outside our communion, can we answer the question “Are we approaching unity?” with a hearty Yes? Or do we perhaps even forget the question, and just worship?

“Behold, how good and pleasant it is for brothers to dwell together in unity!...for there the LORD commanded the blessing – life forever.” Psalm 133

Posted by Michael at 12:44 PM | Permalink

Why? I ask why?

Spray On Mud for 4X4 vehicles.

Posted by Michael at 8:52 AM | Permalink

The plastic mustang came from a green mustang that crashed into a minivan as I sat on my friend Jeff's patio.

We heard the revving of two engines in what sounded like street racing, saw two cars side-by-side, heard a loud noise, saw a puff of smoke, watched a mustang skid over 100 feet into a parked minivan. Then he revved his engine and tried to keep on driving. Only when he realized that his car was mush did he stop.

Of course, he told the cop that he "wasn't speeding," and that "it wasn't my fault," etc, etc. Needless to say, the cop came and asked "can I get a witness?" to which we responded.

After all was said and done, I picked up the debris, this little plastic mustang, which now runs across the top of my computer screen.

Posted by Michael at 11:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

So in the last several days I've made a list of things I've seen at Caltech that make me go Gee, someone else does that too?

1) I had taken a break to walk to Borders to read a programming book, and when I came back, I saw a student walking in front of me, staring of into space, tapping the fingers of both hands in a cycle onto his thumbs in rapid succession.

2) I saw someone going back to check if he'd locked his car - after he'd locked his car - and after he'd already checked once before. :o)

3) I saw someone turning a key in a lock while counting. My favorite number when locking doors is 5. What's yours?

4) I've seen several students walking from one end of campus to another with their noses stuck into a book and almost bump into something.

5) It counts as humor to say, "Hey, the spellchecker changed RoboRally into "Rob orally'," and "Give him a raise" sparks jokes about jacks and hydraulic lifts.

Posted by Michael at 11:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Extreme Ironing!

Galleries here.

Posted by Michael at 2:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Rereading Friday's posting (The Color of Life, the Universe...) I realized that it's probably not about enjoying the priesthood like I originally thought it was. I know I'm going to enjoy it at some point.

The equation in the title refers to Potential Energy. The more mass, and the higher the object, the more Potential Energy. You drop it, the object develops Kinetic Energy, and can leave a mark on whatever it lands on.

But imagine you have a ball, and you drop it, then bounce it with your hand, your knee, your foot, and it drops gently to the ground without any kind of impact. You've stunted it's potential energy at several locations and rewritten the equation when you bounce it on some body part at a lower location, thus giving it less and less potential.

The same thing can happen with people. They may begin with a lot of potential, but through a series of varied choices they end up rolling gently onto the grass with barely a noise.

That is my lament. I believe I began with a lot of options, and could have made a name for myself as a scientist, programmer, or who knows what. Instead, I'm a mid-level white-collar worker who eats too many rye crackers with butter and avacado, and drinks too much Earl Grey tea, and gently rolls in to the office at around 9am, much without notice.

Sure, I could start now to try and make a name for myself. Rewrite my equation, script my own code, etc., etc., etc. so that I make a name for myself as some great foible of western science and/or technology.

And that's where the chicken meets the egg. --> As a priest, you don't make a name for yourself. You make visible the Name of God.

But I don't want to do that yet. I still have delusions of grandeur that I don't want to give up at the moment.

And that is bound to pose a problem.

Posted by Michael at 1:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I'm going to be a priest, despite myself. Or is it in spite of myself?

1) I prefer to use foul language even when appropriate "safe" language would work. I do not enjoy holding back my language because of running the risk of offending - but I do it anyway, because I really would offend.

2) I prefer dirty humor to the G-rated versions. No "two white horses fell in the mud" jokes for me. And if it's irreverent too, to me it brings an added charm. For an example, here.

3. I enjoy drinking wine. Red wine. And much of it. Sometimes to excess, because there are times when it makes things funnier.

4. I enjoy being funny, even at the expense of others. Sometimes especially at the expense of others.

5. I enjoy looking at things of beauty, like birds, flowers, shapely cars, and especially the female form.

6. I enjoy eating unhealthy foods, eating more than I need to, and relishing in the flavors of it all. I enjoy eating foods I'm allergic to, even if it means I'll get a migraine. I do it because I love the flavor, and I'm willing to pay the price.

7. I enjoy being lazy when I have far too much to do, and I enjoy being busy when I have far too little to do.

8. I like the color red, the number 6, and the letter M.

The other day I saw a bumper sticker that read "God save me from your followers." It made me laugh, and cry. Because I know sometimes it applies to me. And you know what? I kind of like that too... I think that might be a problem to overcome.

Posted by Michael at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Found this on a German news site:
Mobile Phone Throwing International Championships

Watch the video here.

apparently originated in Finland, and is all the craze.

Posted by Michael at 4:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Supreme Court rules against file swapping

Posted by Michael at 4:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

So one small part of the Credit Card project needs to change to appease the higher ups. Trouble is, I'm stuck.

Right now, people make a selection in one drop down box, and that populates selections in another drop down box. Good enough. But now, in addition to this, I'm told that if a person makes a choice in the second drop down that needs further clarification, then a text box should appear where they can enter that information.

Normally, this wouldn't be such a problem, but since the all of the secondary choices are created dynamically using the createElement() method, there comes with it a certain complexity that is driving me nuts.

I'm at that stage where I'm thinking it's either not possible at all, or not possible for me. This latter option is really irritating, but most likely true.

Want to see the code? Give me feedback? Feel free to contact me.

Posted by Michael at 11:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Trust Voltaire to find a witty way of saying things.

The last few blogs (The color of...etc.) were attempts to grapple with a growing lack of clarity regarding my call to ministry. I wasn't doubting that I am to be in ministry, I was just doubting the nature of it. The question going around in my head was "Am I to be a priest?"

Or, maybe more specifically, the question would be, am I going to enjoy being a priest? I mean, I'm sure certain aspects I'm bound to enjoy, but others not so much - if at all.

Let's face it, people can be real $#!^$ sometimes, me being one of the biggest if the situation tweaks me just so. Oh, and they can be really needy and broken and full of anger. Not to mention that when you go this route, you have all sorts of words that you hope will apply to you at some point: submissive [to God], available, sensitive & receptive [to the Spirit], abandonded, spiritual, kind (pshaaa!), humble, meek, peaceful, abstinent, continent (no, not that kind; I mean, yes, that kind, and the other kind. oh whatever) and the list goes on... Tall order for any mere mortal. Honestly, how's a priest to have any fun?*

Besides that, have you seen our toys? They're 2000 years old! Honestly. I've seen the digital pocket pets, but when do you think we'll get a programmable Rosary, or a programmable liturgy? How is a priest to have any fun?

Needless to say, my weeklong bout with doubt has ended, and I am yet again steady in my belief that my call is for the priesthood. However, I do also believe that these times of questioning everything are necessary. Necessary because without them we would fail to grow. Necessary because without them we would fail to understand ourselves better. Necessary because without these doubts, the certainty truly would be absurd.

*as an aside:
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -Voltaire

[Hey Cody, how'd I do this time around?]

Posted by Michael at 8:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

On my way home from church today, I drove by a building with a huge sign:

Joe Schmoe

Attorney at Law

The "Attorney at Law" portion of the sign on the building was really big, and I thought, "Is there any other kind of attorney?" I mean, if not, the sign could have just ended with "attorney," and saved a bundle on signage.

Apparently, however, the word attorney signifies someone who is "appointed to represent another's interests" and can be in business or legal affairs. (see alsohere)

So, I guess that means that you do need to specify what type of attorney you are, and for what purpose you have been appointed to represent another's interests.

Bummer about the signage...

Posted by Michael at 4:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This morning, in our all-hands meeting, our department watched a film about legendary Caltech physics professor Richard P. Feynman.* Feynman exemplified the idea of science at play, a thing he called being deliberately irresponsible, because he never allowed himself to join any committees or be put to the task of leading any projects. Instead, he focused himself on anything that motivated him, following the questions that intrigued him. For his efforts, he won the Nobel Prize and various other awards as well, and was called one of the most original thinkers of our time.

In the movie, The Pleasure of Finding Things Out, Feynman talks about growing up, and discovering elements of physics through conversations with his dad, and how he got interested in mathematics, and relished in the sheer pleasure of just figuring things out. He found a series of math books, through which he learned algebra, trigonometry, and calculus – calculus at the age of 13. When he went to take the book out of the library, the librarian looked at him, and asked why he would want that, since he was only a child; he responded that the book was for his dad – a deliberate lie, told to make sure he could check out the book.

Now, this one little side story about math, and the drive and passion for figuring things out got me to thinking about my passions. And perhaps, in the process, I figured out a bit of where my extreme cynicism comes from.

In the seventh grade, when our grade was learning about computers, we began with programming in Basic. While the teacher was helping others to write “Hello World!” I was programming animations. I continued on for a bit, until it became clear that if I would continue with this sort of programming, I would need to find someone with the skills to teach me - a difficult thing in a small arctic school. Fast forward to high school, where I took algebra, algebra 2, trigonometry in a single year, and began teaching myself calculus. And all of this for the joy of doing it, and the thought that I might actually make it into one of the exciting universities (unfortunately, Caltech put me on their wait list as an undergraduate and MIT found themselves obliged to do similarly. Bummer.) All along, people questioned why I did the things I did - like doing math during my Christmas break - but I knew: I did it because I enjoyed it.

So, for reasons that are hard to define (other than that I didn't get accepted to CIT or MIT), this hard science guy found himself in a liberal arts college, changing his mind at the whim of his fancy, following psychology, linguistics, and finally Classical History. And somewhere along the way, I think I lost that one thing – the pleasure of it all. At some point, I had to decide on a career choice – one that would produce the color green rather than the color of desire.

And similarly, now I question where my passions really lie. What do I really do just for the love of it - the desire - and what do I do simply out of obligation? The jury is still out on this one.

"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." - R. Feynman

*Though Feynman spent the years 1950-1988 at Caltech, he was originally an MIT graduate.

Posted by Michael at 4:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

two days of a not so pleasant bout with migraine and an inability to concentrate on pretty much anything. postings to resume sometime today...

Posted by Michael at 10:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

While working at Alaska Airlines, I began working on my MBA at Seattle Pacific University, in the hopes of moving into a "better" position with the company. Better, in this case, implying more influence and more money, in a company that operated very much under the pyramid scheme, relying little, if anything, upon input from those actually working with customers. Two quarters into the MBA, however, I realized my motivations and pulled out of the program, a decision I don't regret at all.

Put more clearly, my motivations were bound to a company I had no faith in, and one I could not recommend as a good work place to any of my friends. True, more money would have been an outcome of a better position. But at what cost? I would have found myself working for something I could put no respectable amount of energy into.

So instead, I quit my job and found myself opening my own business as a web developer during the IP boom. And there I discovered an interesting thing. Money was not a motivator for me.

It seems that for me, the motivator has always been the pure joy of discovery, of producing, of creating something of benefit to others. And so in control of my own enterprise I entered into what I had hoped would be the joy of providing a service to others that would benefit all involved.

Instead, in short order, I discovered that the color of money discolors the outlook of even the most decent of people. Most businesses attempted to drive down the amount of money they paid me, which is to be expected, but when a price was agreed upon, they paid in full, and on time; the most refreshing thing about this type of work was that people were honest with you about the fact that they were trying to screw you out of your pay.

Unfortunately, I discovered this was not the case with churches and fellow Christians. The only work that I provided and was never paid for was work done for Christian businesses, and Churches; losses to a tune of 4500 dollars – and that was with the large discounts I was already providing as a service to the Kingdom. Even though prices had been agreed upon, payment was slow, and every call resulted in a veiled guilt trip in the hopes that I would feel led to drop the price or offer some of the work for free – despite the already deep discounts. It was disconcerting to work in an environment where what you had already provided (service, discounts) was not appreciated, and where communication was anything but honest. And so I entered into working for others again, and letting my employers deal with collecting money, and the processing of client demands.

And so here I sit, producing & programming for others, with my sister’s question in my head, contemplating what motivates me to do the things I do.

[originally intended for 6/23, but due to illness, posted retroactively on 6/24]

Posted by Michael at 11:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson went on a camping trip. After a meal and a bottle of wine they lay down for the night, and went to sleep.

Some hours later, Holmes awoke and nudged his faithful friend. "Watson, look up at the sky and tell me what you see."

Watson replied, "I see millions and millions of stars."

"What does that tell you?"

Watson pondered for a minute. "Astronomically, it tells me that there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically, I observe that Saturn is in Leo. Horologically, I deduce that the time is approximately a quarter past three. Theologically, I can see that God is all powerful and that we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, I supect that we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. What does it tell you?"

Holmes was silent for a minute, then spoke. "Watson, you moron. Someone has stolen our tent."
===============================

This past weekend, as I mentioned, my sister came for a visit, and we spent some time discussing various aspects of life and the state of our souls. One of the most pressing things on my mind of late is this state of ennui I seem to be in.

Of notable mention was my current job, current friendships, and future projects and plans. Pertaining to my job, my sister asked a poignant question, asking what was the last time I had enjoyed waking up and going to a job – or at least didn’t mind it so much. And I mentioned my job as a tour bus driver in Alaska, carting around blue-hairs from Florida, recounting the lore of the Eskimo, and telling them dirty jokes.

To which she responded – “Carsten, that was twelve years ago.”
“That long? Are you sure?”
“Yes. I’m sure. Twelve years.”

Naturally, I was a bit disturbed by this. It seems that in every job I’ve ever had, I’ve spent time learning new things so that I could move on to something “better”. It hasn’t been all bad, mind you, while at Alaska Airlines I taught myself web programming during my graveyard shift in the Central Reservations Control department. A skill which landed me job after job, helped with money for seminary, and put me into my present predicament.

And then my sister said, “Do you think that maybe it’s not the jobs, but your perspective?”

She’s probably right.

[Post originally intended for Wednesday, 6/22, though posted retroactively on 6/24, due to illness.]

Posted by Michael at 10:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This past weekend my sister came out for a visit from Tucson, and we spent a good part of our down-time playing Trivial Pursuit, a game we both love, but for which we find few willing participants.

My sister enjoyed the fact that she didn't feel guilty about answering as many of the questions as possible right - normally it irritates people, so she starts to pretend she doesn't know the answers, just so that they'll keep playing.

Me, I told her that I don't care about looking like a cocky bastard, I just like to play the game. So if it means I play against a team of 4, that's fine by me.

Unfortunately, what this usually means is that the game will be shelved until my sister's next visit to Southern California, and for her, the game won't happen unless she travels 500 miles to play.

Posted by Michael at 10:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

the one thing I've never figured out how to be without...

[journal entry]

Posted by Michael at 4:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Growing up in a conservative church in an out of the way portion of our country, there were several beliefs that I simply took for granted. Others, I knew to be a bit overboard, like "If you smoke or drink, you're going to HELL." My parents, though missionaries, had no such strange notions of the irrational anger of God. Nonetheless, I made up my mind that I would never smoke, drink, cuss, or pop the cork on a rare vintage. Among other things...

And then I went off to college.

The first two notable things that happened at were that I realized that no one knew me or my parents, and that I no longer had to uphold there reputation, and that I was inundated with the cultural mindset of 20th century America – a culture I had been happily oblivious to in our little wilderness paradise. And I came to entertain all the arguments that grabbed life by the horns and made it its own. But in doing that I disregarded all of those convictions that I had formerly called my own. Thankfully, I at least realized that I was maintaining these convictions purely to uphold my parents’ reputation.

And here is where pride comes in. The moment I entertained these arguments for and not against any of these make it or break it choices, I began to feel that I knew better. I knew better than those who had gone before me, or who had provided me with accurate information regarding the nature of Nature. In short, I wasn’t convinced that these convictions were right. I needed to check for myself.

Now, I think that this is a natural part of growing up: failing to listen to those who have gone before, like they’ve never eaten the same apple. Each of us does it, and each of us learns our own lessons, some slower than others. But the fact is we do it still, with our peers, with ourselves. We hear something, and refuse to consider it in all its depth, unconvinced that we would fare the same if we stepped over the edge of this boundary. Why? Because we’re proud and arrogant.

And we do it with God too. But then we call it theology and say things like, “Sure, it says <insert bible verse here>, but that verse is antiquated, and a gracious God would never really think twice about that.” As if we could know the mind of God.

Strange but true, living a life of solid, courageous convictions requires just a small bit of humility. And true humility only comes from true submission. Maybe the meek really will inherit the Earth.

Posted by Michael at 5:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

My office is on the fifth floor of the Millikan library at Caltech, and so to get there, I walk by the new books on display every morning. This morning:

quo vadis, quantum mechanics?

Tell me, if you saw a book with that title, where would you want to go...

Posted by Michael at 8:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

About two weeks ago, a friend of mine and I had recently had dinner together and were discussing the nature of religion & belief, and what effect belief had on daily living. In particular, my friend wondered if he truly believed certain tenets of the faith. To which I asked, "Are you acting according to these beliefs, or ignoring them?" Getting a "yes" answer from him, I reminded him that the most important clue to his faith was whether he acted according to his beliefs - his convictions. In other words, I said, it could be argued that if someone consistently does not do what he says he believes, he is basically proving that he does not really believe; if it was a deeply held conviction, a person would not fail to do it on such a consistent basis.

This past Saturday, the 2005 graduates of Fuller Seminary celebrated commencement. During the service, Dr. Mouw, Fuller's President, gave a speech in which he discussed Conviction and Civility, a topic of a previous book of his. In this book, he pointed out that Christianity has numerous people with strong convictions, but lacking in civility. Reversed, we also find many Christians with a great amount of civility, but lacking in any real convictions. What the world needs, he argued, was people with both conviction and civility.

Now, this speech jogged my memory of the conversation with my friend, and prompted me to consider the nature of convictions. The word stems from the Latin convincere (4^th principle part), meaning “to convince,” and the word itself means “a firmly held belief.” Nothing new there. Still, I felt the need to do a detailed analysis of my own convictions, and examine my own responses to them.

To do this, I posed two basic questions for each major belief: 1) Am I willing to excuse behavior contrary to this conviction in others or myself? 2) If yes, why?

I found a few “yes” answers among them, with reasons ranging anywhere from “They simply don’t know any better. Yet.,” to “I don’t want to step on toes,” to “I’m not convinced..” The first, I believe, operates under a sense of compassion, the second under fear, and the last under pride (more on that later). Any “yes” response that comes from a “not convinced” ultimately boils down to the fact that what I had perceived as a conviction, really is not. I don’t believe it.

The explanation for this disconnect, I believe, comes from cultural influences. Another friend and I went out last night and ended up having a conversation about sex. He argued that our Western Christian cultural mores have imbued us with “convictions of shame” that we hold as true, though we truly do not believe them; end result is that we feel shame when we should not. I argued a different line, of course, but we ultimately agreed on the fact that some of our “convictions” are passed down culturally. We hold these beliefs even though we have never questioned them and never found them to be our own. Nevertheless, we hold them because failing to uphold them would be unthinkable within our particular culture. As we grow and experience more, some of these previously held convictions are forgotten, and ultimately taken up again as convictions, but not without our own wallowing in the history that provides the convincing.

Posted by Michael at 12:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Disney Land? Ha. It's my kitchen.

Recently I was diagnosed with a dirth [who says dirth?] of allergies, which apparently have caused a large part of my headaches. Among them are: peanuts, wheat, oats, soy, corn, coffee, chocolate, and citrus fruits - basically the staple foods of three continents, and the ingredients in pretty much any pre-packaged food.

So I was pretty bummed about what I could eat. That is, until I found the following wonderful things at Whole Foods, Wild Oats, and Trader Joes:
Sunflower Seed Butter - like Peanut butter, but with a barely noticeable sunflower seed flavor
Wasa Rye Crackers - rye crisp bread
Bavarian Liverwurst - mmm, mmm, good (and it's not made with Corn Syrup like the American version is)
Spelt Ancient Grain Bread - spelt, quinoa, amaranth, kamut, millet, sunflower, flax, potatoes
REd Bliss Potato Chips - made with olive oil instead of corn oil, or soy oil
Whole Foods Soda - made with Evaporated Cane Juice, rather than High Fructose Corn Syrup
Buckwheat Flakes - finally a breakfast cereal I can eat, since buckwheat has no relation to regular wheat
Agave Nectar - nectar from the agave cactus, and a good substitute for honey

On the upside, my Doctor told me my body thrives on meat, so now I have a medical reason (ahem) to purchase large quantities of steak... Why wouldn't my kitchen be happy?

Posted by Michael at 11:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

About two months ago I was hit with a spate of obligations, all of which caused me no small amount of grief. I didn't want to do any of them.

Each of them brought its own fears or dreams of future sacrifice, none of which seemed like anything pleasurable. So naturally, the idea of shurking off those obligations popped into my head as a possibility. Nevertheless, I fulfilled my obligations, but not without a considerable amount of energy expended on my part.

Now, contrast this with a weekend bike ride, or watching a new movie, or doing my taxes, and suddenly there is a spike in energy and I can easily accomplish the goals and even find pleasure in them ... I want to do them.

What's interesting is the connection mindy and body have that from we can document how from one instance to the next, we can go from "ug, I'm tired," to "Sure, let's do it, I don't need to go to bed any time soon."

And it's all based on desire, which finds its roots in the promise of pleasure or the avoidance of pain (Freud).

The downside (or, upside?) of all of this is that it requires you to really know yourself, for how else can you properly choose to do those things that give you pleasure? Or know those things you had better avoid, or give to someone else because - let's face it - you suck at doing them?

That’s all well and good, until you hit a point where you have an obligation that you don’t need to avoid because you are remarkably suited for it, but you have absolutely no promise of pleasure.¹ In other words, you have the ability, you have the directive, but you ask the infamous actor’s question: “What’s my motivation?” What then? Are you just supposed to create the desire – the motivation?

That doesn’t work.

I read somewhere that the mark of maturity is how one responds to disappointment or difficulty. That is, do you fuss and fume, or do you keep plodding along, making – to borrow an overused phrase - lemonade out of lemons? That takes energy I’d rather use for other things. But, still, it's an obligation. What do do about that?

I think I’ll plod along making lemonade - but I won’t add any sugar.

1. I’m sure you’ve guessed by now, that’s the spot I’m in – but I’m not giving up any of the details… bummer for you, huh?

Posted by Michael at 2:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

A friend forwarded this to me, and I couldn't resist posting it here:

Posted by Michael at 10:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Law of the Conservation of Matter states that "Matter can neither be created nor destroyed." This applies also to energy, though in a more fluid state, so that "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but can be changed from one form to another." (First Law of Thermodynamics)

These Laws led me to formulate my own Law, which I called the Law of the Conservation of Fat. You see, whenever I lost weight - say, ten pounds - I would run across people who would say that they had just gained ten pounds; sometimes it was two people who had each gained five, etc. And since Fat is matter, I just figured, "Hey, I'm a genius." (Of course, I'm sure it was just a fat head.)

A while back, however, I was speaking with a friend who asked the question, "Is there a finite amount of suffering and joy in the world?" (The Law of the Conservation of Suffering? ...of Joy?)

Now, that question isn’t nearly as much of a joke as we might be tempted to make it. Let’s just – for the sake of argument – assume that on this earth, there is a finite amount of suffering and joy (infinite suffering and infinite joy are reserved for the afterlife). Then, going with the assumption that these elements are finite, then the question, stated differently, becomes, “Is someone suffering for my happiness?”

Our first reaction will of course be, “No.”

But if we take a moment to examine our lives, we’ll no doubt be surprised to find out how often we derive happiness from someone else’s misery (“Tragedy is when something bad happens to me. Comedy is when something bad happens to you.”), or take pleasure in our current state of wealth, power, peace, or being. Wealth is a relative term, and implicit in its definition is poverty and suffering. Power is likewise relative to weakness or ineffectual actions, and if we have any power at all, it implies someone else does not. How are we using it? Implicit in the definition of peace is the eventuality of war, pain, anxiety, suffering, and to take pleasure in our current state of peace implies that someone endured those horrific elements so that we could now live in peace. I don’t think it is a far stretch to say that in this world there can be no happiness without suffering, or that for every finite amount of joy there could exist an equal and finite amount of suffering.

But what of those who find Peace in the midst of suffering, anxiety, or war? Those who take pleasure in their current state of being, and simply are happy just to be? These people have touched the infinite, have burst through the balance, and found themselves on the edge of eternity, a chasm of infinite Joy.

And yes, someone did suffer for that happiness.

He endured infinite suffering in a finite world so that we might experience infinite joy in this finite world.

Posted by Michael at 10:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

At one point, when I was younger, my friend from across the street and I planned on building a submarine out of the 50 gallon steel drums that littered our little Alaskan town. Another time, we were making a hang glider out of an old sheet, and 1/4 dowel rods. But what really sticks out in my mind is the parachute we made with some twine and an old sheet.

It was winter, and in our part of Alaska, we didn't get much snowfall, but snow blew in from everywhere, leaving us with a 13 foot snowdrift in front of my friend’s 2-story house. Unfortunately, being so far north, the snow doesn't stay powder; instead, the outer layer melts slightly during the day, then refreezes at night, leaving a hard protective ice-covering over the drift. Each new snowfall that covered the previous snow bank ends up with its own frozen shell, leaving you with a layer-cake type of drift: soft-hard-soft-hard, etc. (Incidentally, this makes digging a series of interconnected tunnels all the more difficult... but that's another story.)

On this particular occasion, we scoured our houses for a thick sheet, and ways to fasten a rope to the edges, without ripping through the sheet. Next, we had to figure out a way to bind the rope to ourselves, without the ropes getting tangled. Once we had the system working, it was time to test it out. We would do this by climbing to the top of the ridge of the roof on the second story, and jump the six feet out to make sure we landed on the top of the 13-foot snowdrift.

Naturally, I thought my friend would do the testing.
He thought I would, because, as he said, I was lighter than he was, and we couldn't be sure if the sheet would hold up.

Hmmmmm..... Houston, we have a problem.

Strange how we don’t question the integrity of the system when we have nothing to lose. But bring in personal loss, and suddenly we demand that the system works flawlessly, and that we have assurance of a desirable outcome.

By what right do we demand that assurance of an outcome according to our own desires?

A few days ago, my priest and I were discussing the concept of a getting a clear directive from God, and that not having a clear directive may, in fact, be a clear directive.

What a pain in the ass. (The concept - not my priest.)

Because, you see, operating without a clear directive feels like freefalling. On my back I have a parachute I don’t know will work and my landing is unclear. Past experience tells me the landing looks like a big 13-foot snow drift, but will actually be lined with layers of sharp ice. And maybe, just a little bit, God reminds me of my friend, who says, “I thought you were going to jump.”

Posted by Michael at 9:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Why Evangelicals get trashed in the media...
The Boondocks 6/02
The Boondocks 6/03
The Boondocks 6/04

I'd cry over the state of the Church, but I'm laughing too hard...

The beautiful irony of this all is that this appeared the day after my friend and I had dinner to discuss why God matters in daily life...

Posted by Michael at 10:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

As I was buying my hard-boiled eggs this morning, I noticed one of the superbright individuals at Caltech wearing a t-shirt that said:

Shrödinger's Tequila: Drink Outside the Box

And I had to laugh out loud, which says something about me, and where I stand on the geek spectrum.

Related Articles:

Shrödinger's Cat
Physics @ about.com

Posted by Michael at 9:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

This morning on the way to work, while crossing over the Wilson St.-210 overpass (The Bridge over the River Why?), I noticed three people clad in hard hats and orange vests sitting in lawn chairs, talking animatedly with their hands. Underneath their chairs they had bags of what looked like food.

And I thought, 'How cool would that be, to take one day and swap out my duties, just to sit on an overpass watching the cars drive by and eating food.... and I could wear a hard-hat too...'

But alas, I sit in my Dilbert cubicle instead, eating hard boiled eggs... and they didn't even give me my own hard hat.

So I'm wearing my bike helmet instead.

Posted by Michael at 9:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

my constant companions...

So I just bought a bare-bones digital camera so instead of taking the time to promote excellent photography, I've decided to just post silly things like this up here.

More to come...

Posted by Michael at 1:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Today I broke the internet

It wasn't my fault. Really.

What happened is that I screwed around with Microsoft's IIS 5.0 to modify some settings so that I could have an appropriate programming language to do the processing of the Credit Cards that I need to do for work. Unfortunately, the instructions I was following on some of the websites that purported to help me set this up, did not help. So I went backwards on the directions, and just gave up on figuring this out. Only one problem: every website - 15 in all - that is running on our web server came up with an error message when I tried to view it in a browser. The error message was "Error 403.2: Read Access Denied."

Crud.

75 excruciating minutes later - after I told my friend Zachary, our Network Administrator, that I had just made his life a living hell - this genius managed to restore everything.

Thank God.

Unfortunately, this means finding a new way of doing the programming.

Posted by Michael at 12:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

So today's Daily Office included Luke 17.20-37, where Jesus is telling his disciples and the Pharisees what it will be like when the Son of Man is revealed.

Basically, it boils down to the fact that people will be doing similar things, and that one will be left, but another will be taken away. And the disciples ask, "Where, Lord?"

Now, the antecedent to the question is "the one taken away" which implies that the disciples are asking him to where these people will be taken.

And Jesus answers, "Where the corpse is, there the vultures will gather."

Now, I don't know about you, but in my mind, that doesn't compute. It in no way answers the question of where the one person will be taken to. Nor does it answer where I would suppose the bad people would go, or where those left behind will stay. It just hangs out there like a "riddle me this" sort of thing.

While I know the answer to a question like "Um, Jesus, what exactly do you mean by that?" would get a proper response (you know, something like "How long must I be with you? Do you still not understand, oh ye of little faith?!"), I can't help but imagine that the disciples did in fact ask that and get a response similar to "You know, there are a lot of birds out today. Have I ever told you to consider the birds of the air or the lilies of the field?"

Posted by Michael at 2:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)