Charlie Wear’s Notes

Following Jesus means letting go of anger. Jesus agreed that murderers are subject to judgment, but he went beyond the letter of the law to explain its spirit. Road rage is not an option for the follower of Jesus!

Cursing others or calling them idiots is motivated from the same darkness that kills. Religious sacrifices in the absence of reconciliation are worthless. Court disputes should be settled quickly.

There have been a number of convicted murderers who have had jailhouse conversions. These seem pretty understandable, yet I think there is healthy skepticism about the depth of a murderer’s commitment to following Jesus. I wonder what the latest Gallup survey would say about the reputation of Christian’s concerning anger.

Jesus does not merely recommend that we attend an anger management course, even the courts urge this in cases of domestic violence. What Jesus’ urges is a change of heart that gets at the roots of anger. For myself, I always have a good reason for my anger.

"Did you see how that fool cut me off?"
"She doesn’t appreciate how hard I work."
"My teenager can’t seem to say anything without a lot of disrespect."
"That clerk wouldn’t refund my money."

What kind of a world would it be if the followers of Jesus were known for their peaceful demeanor? It’s kind of nice to think about isn’t it?

"Let your good deeds shine out for all to see…"

This little light of mine, I’m going to let it shine, let it shine, let it shine, let it shine, I sang in the "Cradle Roll" room. Dressed in my Sunday best along with the other toddlers I was singing about one of Jesus’ most important "commandments." I even remember some of the hand motions. Hide it under a bush, oh now, I’m going to let is shine…

Disciples of the Church have done a pretty bad job of being salt and light. Evangelicals are better known for narrowmindedness than they are known for compassion. While President Bush talked about compassionate conservatives his presidency has not shone with many examples.

In the aftermath of terrible calamities, well-known Christian leaders attribute them to God’s wrath and judgment against nations. Researchers publish books that seem to underscore that the culture thinks that Christians are, well, Un-Christian. Authors write that people like Jesus, but they hate the church. If we were General Motors, or Coca-Cola and had messed up our brand this much, we would change our name and logo and start all over.

Good deeds? Do we even have any idea what that means? Mother Teresa and World Vision come to mind when I think about good deeds. Feed the Children and the Red Cross ring a bell. Strangely, I don’t think about Joel Osteen, Rick Warren or, for that matter, Robert Schuller or Billy Graham. Am I missing something here?

Too many of us live our lives as "undercover" Christians. I think there is a good reason for this. Churches have emphasized church participation over "good deeds." So much time, energy and resources are spent in religious services and other church-centric activities that there is little time left for "good deeds." I may be on the rotation as a nursery volunteer, but not in the feed-the-homeless rotation, and that is perfectly normal.

Followers of Jesus give witness by their "good deeds." Not to earn their way to heaven, boy, is that an easy trap to fall into. Not to win the gold ribbon for outstanding community service. No, these good deeds flow naturally from the life of a follower of Jesus. You may be a committed church member. But check your good deed quotient. Are you a committed follower of Jesus? Followers of Jesus, let their good deeds shine.

The first commandment of Jesus was not written on tablets of stone and handed down on a mountaintop. It was a simple invitation to fishermen engaged in their occupation. It is the same invitation he makes to each of us today. "Come, follow me…"

if we want to know what it means to "follow Jesus" we will have to read on, through the gospels, as layer upon layer, and example upon example is given. We will also have to unlearn and peel back the layers that have been added to our thinking by those who have invited us to a different kind of followership.

Jesus did not invite the first disciples:
1. To accept him as their personal savior.
2. To pray a prayer.
3. To confess their sins and repent of them.
4. To come to his church service.
5. To volunteer in the nursery.
6. To tithe.
7. To discover their spiritual gifts.
8. To attend his "101" class.
9. To sign a membership covenant.
10. To adhere to a set of doctrines.
11. To be baptized.
12. To fast.
13. To give up smoking, drinking, playing cards, dancing or watching TV or movies.
14. To quit their jobs.
15. To attend classes, Bible School or seminary.
16. To become ordained as pastors.

I was "discipled" as a member of a denomination as a child. There wasn’t a lot of talk about "following Jesus." There was a lot of talk about the kinds of things included in the "Not" list. I realized a couple of months ago that I have renounced my discipleship to church, or for that matter, church services.

This is not because I haven’t been a part of some really great church services. I’ve been a congregant, a worship leader and a preacher at some pretty well executed "services." It’s not because I don’t like to sing praise and worship songs, or hymns and anthems. It’s not because I don’t enjoy a good sermon, well-preached with passion. It’s because I’ve come to believe that my participation in church services may not be a crucial component in "following Jesus." It’s because I’ve come to believe that the time, energy, and resources that are expended in perpetuating and starting church services keeps people who might really enjoy following Jesus from doing so.

I want to make it clear that I don’t believe that house churches, simple churches, monastic communities, or even mega churches, are better or worse when compared to each other. I have simply come to the place where I believe that membership in a church is not what Jesus had in mind when he made that original invitation.

Next-Wave has had five editors since it first started publishing in January 1999. In chronological order they are: Rogier Bos, David Hopkins, Jason Evans, Bob Hyatt and Charlie Wear. I put my name at the end of the list because I think of myself as the interim editor, that is, when my regular editor moves on to other endeavors, I fill in. This month marks the end of Bob Hyatt’s two-year tenure as editor of Next-Wave.

With the exception of myself and Rogier Bos, each of Next-Wave’s editors have started out as article contributors. In fact, David Hopkins probably still holds the record as the most prolific Next-Wave author. Each editor brought something unique to the mix. Bob Hyatt’s unique flavor has centered around his role as the founding pastor of a church in Portland, Oregon, the evergreen community.

Bob’s editorials and articles always had something of the pastor’s life in them. During his time as editor, he and his wife have birthed two children and his church has added an extra location.

Being editor of Next-Wave is a labor of love. It doesn’t pay much (in fact, the position is entirely voluntary). There isn’t much glory. I speak for myself here, there is a sense that one is playing a role in what the Holy Spirit is doing in the world today and that brings its own thanks.

Next month a new era begins as my friend, Scott Bane, takes over as editor of Next-Wave. Scott is a pastor starting a "church" in Northwest Indiana. More about him next month.

A little known fact about Next-Wave:
1. You can find Next-Wave through three web addresses: next-wave.org, the-next-wave.org, and the-next-wave-ezine.info. This is the result of an attempt to initiate a collaborative editorial content managment system using Manila. It was Jason Evans’ idea and worked great for the year that he was editor. After that, not so much :).

Author and pundit Thomas Friedman is surely capable of running Hewlett Packard and for that matter, probably has enough foreign policy experience to be vice president, certainly as much as Dan Quayle or Barack Obama. His solution to our latest financial crisis, a new Resolution Trust Corporation.

For those of you too young to remember in the mid to late 80s we had another financial crisis that wiped out an industry, the savings and loan crisis. Apparently without sufficient regulation and oversight, financial institutions made risky loans that began going bad, toppling the S&Ls and requiring a government bailout.

I remember this time period clearly because I was working with a developer at that time who had utilized a significant number of S&L loans to build real estate projects. All of our projects did well, so there was no downside to the S&L crisis for our business except that we could no longer get financing for our projects.

However, my client became aware of many properties for sale in Texas for less than it cost to build them. He made bids and began his journey toward multiplying his wealth.

Why did the latest crisis occur? Who is to blame? Republicans or Democrats? Congress or the White House? Greedy Wall Street Bankers? Exuberant real estate investors or homeowners? The Federal Reserve? My answer, probably, yes, all of them. It’s been about twenty years since the formation of the RTC in 1989. Wikipedia informs me that the RTC closed or "resolved" 747 thrifts with assets of nearly 400 billion dollars.

The difference between now and 1989 is that the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department have been very proactive in attempting to avoid a complete collapse of the financial system. You may recall that in 1987 there was a severe drop in the stock market as a result of "program" trading. These severe drops are to be avoided at all costs along with something called a bubble.

In any case, what does all of this mean for average folks like you and me? If we are not attempting to finance a mortgage or a business, it doesn’t mean very much. If we are, we may experience some financial stress. It will probably mean that the real estate equity "ATM" will be closed down for a while, or maybe forever.

Carly Fiorina, the former CEO of Hewlett Packard who was fired in 2006 because her employers were convinced that the Compaq-HP merger was a bust, has contributed to the political campaign by indicating that none of the candidates are capable of running HP. Maureen Dowd snarkily said that Fiorina should know since she wasn’t able to run HP either. Of course, Ms. Dowd failed to notice that HP is now the number one computer maker in the US, a position they did not hold pre-merger.

Here is the sad news for all of us who prefer the illusion of control: Neither the President, nor the Congress, nor the Federal Reserve Board control the economy of the United States. They effect it, but they don’t control it. Keep this in mind as blame is assessed in the coming weeks and months. The actual cause of all of this turmoil is a butterfly who passed gas in the Amazon forest in the fall of 2006!

Clearly every media pundit is highly qualified to serve as vice president or president, just ask them and they will tell you. A recent op-ed piece I read pointed out that the Bush presidency has been anti-establishment and that those anti-establishment folks don’t know how to govern.

Apparently, because of the Iraq war, our collective memory has forgotten that the terrorist attacks on September 11 ever occurred. We also seem to have missed that there has not been another terrorist attack on the homeland in seven years. It is clear that the media observers and for that matter, most politicians, don’t know what they don’t know. I believe that the President and the government are constantly dealing with terrorist threats that never make the evening news.

You might wonder, why doesn’t President Bush make these potential calamities public and justify his actions. I think the answer to that question is simple. If we knew the things that threaten us, the US economy and our way of life would grind to a halt.

If you had told me last week as I was planning to take a Metrolink train to LA the following information: 1) A Metrolink accident will claim 25 lives this week; 2) Engineers on Metrolink trains engage in cell phone calls and text messaging while they are driving trains; and 3) the accident could happen anywhere on the system, I guarantee you I would have passed on taking the train.

I remember griping about the fact that I couldn’t take my shaving cream in my carry-on bag for a plane flight last year. You don’t suppose that the government passed those rules about the amount of liquid carry-ons just because they want to torture air travelers?

John McCain made a statement yesterday that was quite presidential, Bush made a similar statement. The essense of their words, "the fundamentals of our economy are strong." While Mr. Obama’s campaign was labeling this current financial crisis as the most serious since the Great Depression, McCain was lending his support to stabilizing the system. You see, the Federal Reserve, an agency not controlled by the executive branch has played a significant role in our latest roller coaster. (see this Washington Post article from 2005) While Bernake asserted prior to his nomination that there was no real estate "bubble." Fed actions since his appointment as Fed chief have had a significant impact on real estate prices.

Here is the dirty little secret, there is not much room for error with the economy and most of what is going to happen is completely out of the control of the federal government, or for that matter the Federal Reserve. If the stock market loses 2000 more points in the Dow Jones Industrial average, then the fireworks we are experiencing now will seem like a 4th of July sparkler. This is what Treasury secretary Poulsen and Fed chief Bernake are trying to prevent. You may notice that all of these folks are saying that the "fundamentals are strong." What else can they say, the "bottom is going to fall out?"

It is a good thing that we don’t know what we don’t know and that we continue our daily lives with this lack of information. Otherwise, things would be getting a whole lot worse a whole lot faster.

I wish I lived in Lakeland, Florida so that I could attend Chris Elrod’s church. See the video below to see how he prepares during setup in the YMCA gym on Sunday mornings…

There are a lot of accusations flying in the presidential campaign. Obama sponsors sex education for kindergarteners. McCain doesn’t know how to use a computer. Palin is a liar. Biden is a bloviator. Have we really degenerated to the "Liar, liar, pants on fire" brand of politics. Do we really need to say, "Sticks and stones may break their bones, but words will never hurt them?"

Palin is full of hubris. I mean, how could she possible be ready to be vice-president, or the most terrifying thought, when McCain dies in office, the president? I mean she wants to ban books and fire her ex-brother-in-law as a state trooper. And you know, you know, you know, she wasn’t really against the "bridge to nowhere." There were really two "bridges to nowhere" and she is in favor of one of them, yeah, take that. And doesn’t she have kids? And Tina Fey can really make her look stupid on Saturday Night Live! Matt Damon is terrified and Sean Combs is astounded that someone from Alaska could be chosen, they don’t even have black people there do they?

Biden never met a twenty-minute answer he didn’t like. Yeah, he dropped out over a plagiarism charge in 1988, but so what? His plan for Iraq, carve it up into three parts, good idea or bad idea? He certainly will be ready on day one. Of course, we don’t have to worry that he might actually end up President, Obama is young and vigorous. If he ever runs he won’t possible succeed, so we won’t ever have to suffer through a Biden inaugural speech.

McCain can’t use a computer, and he doesn’t understand the economy. Does it matter that he doesn’t use a computer because his POW injuries prevent him from operating a keyboard? Isn’t it okay that he has aides who printout and send his emails for him? Does the vision of Barack Obama surfing the web at 2 a.m. make you feel more comfortable with him as President? Maybe he is going to handle all of his presidential emails himself?

Maybe we would be better off with the inventor of the internet as president, Oscar winner Al Gore? Oh, yeah, he already ran and the Supreme Court stole the election from him. Just think, we could have had the highly qualified John Edwards as vice president for the last four years. He was clearly ready.

McCain just doesn’t get it, whatever it is. Obama is a big celebrity, he can’t be president.

This is the state of our political discourse, I think I’ll go take a shower!

Uh, T. Boone Pickens, this could be a problem for your alternative energy plan…

Well, it’s been decided. That last thing that Americans want is a candidate in their 40s who lacks a long history of foreign policy experience and legislative accomplishments. We can’t tolerate a candidate who answers the questions of journalists with a plethora of words.

Now, depending on your political leanings, you probably think I am describing either: Barack Obama or Sarah Palin.

On the other hand, we don’t want a candidate who has been in Washington for decades. Who has been touched by scandal, and who doesn’t take the time to send and answer his own emails. Once again, depending on your political leanings, you probably think I am describing either: John McCain or Joe Biden.

Of course, this is the problem that faces denominations and all sorts of hierarchal religious organizations. It’s very difficult to give the next generation a chance at leadership. In addition, it is also very difficult to adapt the technologies and conditions of a changing culture.

This political season is dominated by tabloid journalism and distorted advertising claims. Why is that? It’s simple, objective reporting doesn’t sell newspapers or magazines, and thirty-second advertising by its very nature calls for distortions in order to make a point in such a short period of time.

The best opportunity to hear the candidates out was the Saddleback Forum, but how many Americans tuned in to two hours of that?

In any case, maybe there will be a huge turnout in this election. That would be over 65% of those eligible to vote exercising their right. Maybe the voting will elect a president who has the majority of the electoral college and a majority of the popular vote. It’s been a long time since a first term president had that kind of mandate.