Daniel Jepsen

Below is a chart showing the amount of medial consumption in the United States and Europe (global here means “complete” or “total”, not world-wide.)  Personally, I was stunned to see the huge difference in just a few generations.

Curious indeed is the fact that magic in western culture reached its zenith, not during the ancient times of Rome, nor the middle ages, but in the 16th and 17th centuries, after the renaissance, when the west was just beginning to perfect the scientific method. In other words, magic grew when science and technology grew.

C.S. Lewis, a professor of medieval literature, put it this way:

There was very little magic in the Middle Ages: the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries are the high noon of magic. The serious magical endeavor and the serious scientific endeavor are twins: one was sickly and died, the other strong and throve. But they were twins. They were born of the same impulse.

Now, what is the point of this? Well, I will let Lewis provide the point, while agreeing with philosopher Peter Kreeft that he makes that this is the most profound point anyone has made about modernity:

There is something which unites magic and applied science while separating both from the wisdom of earlier ages. For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men: the solution is a technique.

Lewis’s words warn us away from a simplistic viewpoint that technology is always bad because it destroys things like craftsmanship, nature, and simplicity, as well as from an equally simplistic viewpoint that technology is always good because of all the cool stuff it gives us. To think christianly about technology will be to think deeply.

Those of us who have been around for a while get used to certain un-ending trends. Athlete’s salaries always get more ridiculous. Televisions always get bigger. Politicians always get sleazier. Some things just seem to have no limit.

Another seemingly endless trend is the crass commercialization and cheapening of the most exalted and meaningful symbols. I’m not talking here about t-shirts made to look like the American flag, as hideous as those are. No, what really set me off this week was the realization that the local Walmart (the arbiter of all things main-stream) is now selling chocolate crosses as part of their Easter candies. That’s right, the ghastly symbol if Roman power and cruelty, transformed by Christ into the ultimate symbol of Divine love bearing and forgiving human sin, has now become…a child’s candy treat.

See it so lovely and inviting, surrounded by flowers (which is surely how the Roman soldiers adorned the cross).  See it nestled on the plastic grass, with Peeps and Reese’s eggs to accompany it.  See the good American child, happy for a moment as he consumes it sugary goodness, then wipes his mouth.  Did I mention it is a CROSS we are speaking of? An instrument of torture and death?  Next year will they sell marshmallow gallows? Perhaps a hanging noose made out of licorice? A candy electric chair? Have we so domesticated the spiritual that we don’t realize how a chocolate cross is just as obscene? Nay, a hundred times more so!

Tomorrow is Easter. I will go to church, remember the meaning of the crucifixion, and celebrate the empty tomb. And I will try very, very hard to forget about chocolate crosses.

I bow my forehead to the dust, I veil my eyes for shame,
And urge, in trembling self distrust, A prayer without a claim.
I see the wrong that round me lies; I feel the guilt within
I hear the groaning and suffering, The world confess its sin

Yet in the maddening maze of things, And tossed by storm and flood,
To one fixed stake my spirit clings; I know that God is good.
I know not what the future has Of marvel or surprise,
Assured alone that life and death His mercy underlies.

And if my heart and flesh are weak To bear an untried pain,
My bruised soul He will not break, But strengthen and sustain.
And so I drift alone at sea, And though I have no oar;
No harm from Him can come to me On ocean or on shore.

I know not where my journey ends, beneath His heavy stare
I only know I cannot drift, Beyond His love and care.

John Greenleaf Whittier

I’m a pastor. And I get depressed sometimes. Are you OK with that admission?

I’m told it is something of an occupational hazard for clergy.  One well-publicized study reported that 70 percent of Pastors said depression haunted them. 70 percent! Another study followed seminary graduates into their careers, and found less than 10 percent were still pastoring 10 years after their graduation. This study did not examine all the reasons why they left, but apparently most did not find the career pleasant. Presumably, their vacancies are often filled by others who are not seminary-trained.

Why is this?  This is more than an academic question to me, obviously.  I never had times of depression before stepping into the role as a pastor of a church. Why is this? Based on a little reading and a lot of thinking and reflecting (as my own times of depression have lessened in the last year) these are my observations.

First, pastors get depressed because they are lonely.  Over half the churches in this country have only one pastor on staff.  Even if a pastor has other staff, if he is “over them” then he does not have co-workers in the normal use of the term.  Much of the pastor’s time will be spent alone, in his office, not interacting with peers.

Now, of course, the pastor does interact with many people during the day.  But most of these are people he is trying to help, or who want something from him.  This is not the same as working with true colleagues.

The second reason pastors get depressed is related to the above: He is always a pastor.  Even when he is sharing a meal with a parishioner or simply talking after church, he is in a role.  It never gets turned off.  He is expected to be warm, empathetic, not too critical or negative, loving, moral, and occasionally profound.  He knows that his congregation (and the world) have expectations that he will act in certain ways, no matter the context.

Personally speaking, this is both good and bad. But the bad part is that most of the time I am unsure whether I can be me.  I always have in the back of my mind, “is this helpful or appropriate as a pastor?”

Thirdly, pastors get depressed because most of the time they simply do not see the results of their work and effort.  Malcolm Gladwell lists three characteristics of a career if it is going be fulfilling. One of those three was a correlation between effort and results (and being able to see that).  Sometimes pastors see this.  For example, a  couple whose marriage has been helped is happy and grateful, say.  But mostly any “results” are both hidden and long-term.  Perhaps this is the reason so many pastors look to attendance and other numbers to validate their work.

Finally, pastors get depressed because they realize the great gulf between who they are and who they are called to be, and the great gulf between their desire to help people and their actual ability to do so.  The modern pastor is expected (by some slice of the congregation at least) to be skilled in scholarship, public speaking, counseling, administration, and leadership, as well as having a consistent and exemplary spiritual walk, being free from pride, aloofness, laziness or any sins of the flesh, and while also keeping his family life together.  How many people do you know really have strengths in all these areas?

For me, this is I think the greatest factor in my own times as depression.  I have an image of myself living a certain way, filling a certain role, and I fail to meet that image nine times out of ten. The sense of being a failure at something you regard as exceedingly important is not a source of joy.

As I mentioned, this depression has lessened in the last year. Though I have no intention of giving others advice in this regard, perhaps it would be worthwhile to describe what has helped me.

Primarily, it is a deepening understanding of  God’s grace and sovereignty. I have come to the conclusion that I will never be a successful pastor, at least in the way this religious culture defines success. And that is OK. In fact, more than OK. God doesn’t need me or my ministry. Nothing of God fails when I do. My weaknesses are part of His wise plan, and have no bearing on His acceptance of me.  And His acceptance, His grace, are all that matter. In addition, I have this huge blessing: His graceful acceptance of me has a face. In the eyes of my wife, I see that her unwavering love and acceptance have their source in His.

When I remember this, it takes my eyes of those things that otherwise depress me. It gives me thankfulness and an inner tranquility that lead way to joy. Now, I am not saying this is my constant state. I still have times when my feelings seem not to have gotten the grace memo. But this alone stops me from despondency most days.

God loves me. Even when I am depressed. Even when I fail. He loves me.  And that is all that matters.

No, the title of the post does not refer to the name of a new rock band, nor a video game.  It is actually a serious issue.

About a month ago I agreed to something I did not think I would ever do: use this blog to send out an occasional post written by someone else. The only reason I agreed was that the incredible cause they are promoting is extremely under-played in the mainstream media, including the online media.  This cause is to give voice to the voiceless: the persecuted minorities around the world, including religious minorities.

I received the first post today. It is about the Nuba people in the northern Sudan.  So, just to be clear, everything after this sentence is not written by me, but is a cause I desperately believe in.

Have you ever wondered what you would have done had you been alive in 1940 and was one of those who knew about the Holocaust?

Would you have been a person of action or a person of silence?

It is perhaps one of the most important issues to wrestle with. More than once in our lifetime we will find ourselves at a crossroad, one where the decision we make will reveal as much about our character as our convictions.

There is a genocide happening right now in Northern Sudan. The government is eradicating their own people. If we don’t speak up and help, no one else will. Each time North Sudan launches an attack to kill their own people, and we in the Western world remain silent, we give our permission to continue.

It is easier to overlook what is happening to our brothers and sisters in Sudan because the task feels overwhelming and thinking about it can make us feel helpless.

The truth of the matter is that one person alone cannot save the Nuba People. But a community of people acting in unison can.

One of the most extraordinary acts found in mankind is when a member of the human race deliberately goes out of his way to help another. It is love in action. It is loving your neighbor. It is doing unto others, as you would have them do unto you.

This month, The Persecution Project Foundation has launched a campaign called Save the Nuba. In order to prevent another genocide, they need the help that only a community can offer.

For those who can afford it, the need for food and medicine is desperate.

For those who have little to give, they’re asking for petitions signed, for awareness to

be spread through social media (Facebook, Twitter and blogs.)

For those who are passionate about this cause, they need your help raising awareness.

Will you join us in speaking up for those who cannot speak for themselves?

Please visit www.SavetheNuba.com to learn ways you can help

I see the presidential election season is heating up.  Soon, it will be a two-man race, Obama versus a candidate to be named later.

I find I care less each election cycle.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I still vote, and I do so after a good deal of reading about the candidate’s positions.  But I have a hard time getting too emotionally worked up about the outcome.  I don’t claim this as a virtue. Maybe (as perhaps you are thinking right now) it is a great fault. This post is not to defend my apathy, but to explain it.

First, let me stress that “twas not always so”. The month after I turned 18, I walked into a cold January night to take part in the Iowa caucuses.  That same election I was allowed to ask a question during the “audience participation” part of the only GOP debate of the Iowa campaign.  That was my fifteen minutes of fame (it was run on all three networks, and yes I am dating myself terribly by putting it that way).  I recall that same season walking up and down the streets of Des Moines hanging GOP campaign material on people’s doorknob.  I hated abortion (still do), resented the welfare state, and was suspicious of ‘socialized medicine” and soft-hearted judges. I was a full-throttled, red-blooded young republican, and I rejoiced at the start of the Reagan Revolution.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the revolution.  It never happened. Reagan and the rest of the GOP talked about social issues all day long, but acted on very few of them. Despite 12 years of Reagan/Bush, Roe v. Wade was still securely on the books, welfare reform was still a dream, and most of the promises made to the religious righters like myself were unfulfilled.  Yes the economy improved under Reagan, but I learned not to give the President too much credit for the ups and downs of something as complicated and multi-faceted as the economy.

When Clinton ran for office, I was still imbibing at the cool-aid well, and agreed that slick Willy was, if not the anti-christ, at least married to her.  His general sleaziness during the Lewinsky affair only confirmed my animus.  But again, funny facts were messing with my mind and creating some disturbing cognitive dissonance.  Not only had the economy rocketed up (see above paragraph) but the social life of America had not fallen apart.  The rates of abortion, teen pregnancy and violent crime all declined from 1992-2000 (see graphs at the end). I was kerpuzzled (family neologism). Could it be, I began to wonder, that the party of the president and congress had little bearing on the social issues I cared about so deeply?  Could it be that society usually reacts against the crusades of the president more than it joins those crusades?

I voted for Bush in 2000, but deeply regretted his decision to invade Iraq on what (to me anyway) were patently false (or at least un-proven) grounds: Iraq’s alleged link with 9/11 and supposed stockpiling of WMDs. To be clear, in my opinion, the war in Afghanistan was probably in line with ‘just war” theory, while that in Iraq was not (and was a dangerous and deadly diversion from the Afghanistan war).  Now, you don’t have to agree with this, and I am not trying to prove my position right now.  My point is this: I liked Bush personally and agreed with his stance on many issues on the home front. But not only did he (like his father and Reagan) fail to deliver on most of these, I viewed his foreign policy as a disaster.  And, here is the important part, I never saw it coming.  Not once during the campaign did he strike me more fundamentally different than Dukakis on foreign policy grounds, especially in the Middle East.  Maybe I just didn’t pay attention enough.  But I never saw it coming.  I learned again the hard lessons: you can’t judge a president’s effect on the country too much until he is actually in office.

Why? The following is only a partial list.  Add your own reasons:

• They campaign differently than they govern
• They face immovable obstacles to their goals
• They create opposition to their policies just because those policies come from a position of authority
• Their judicial appointments are blocked (or vote differently than was foreseen),
• Even their policies that get through often make things worse by their unintended consequences (No Child Left Behind being the classic example)

Again, we must vote. It is our duty and privilege.  As for myself, I refuse to get wrapped up in the politics of the culture wars.  I take abortion very seriously, but I am no longer under a delusion that its scourge will be removed by which party occupies the White House.

I look now for three things in who I will vote for: Which candidate has the personal integrity to handle the incredible power of the presidency well?  And which candidate seems to have the sanest foreign policy?   And thirdly, which candidate comes closes to my views on domestic issues. These three are in order. The checks and balances on the president’s domestic policy are substantial and varied, while the modern president has almost carte blanche in foreign policy, even to the point of starting a war.

So I will vote, and I will pray. But the nights staying up till dawn watching election returns, with either raucous joy or bitter disappointment, are gone.  God is on His throne. His plans will be accomplished. I will try to vote wisely, but I will remember His words: “Do not put your trust in princes”.

————————————————————————————————————————————————–

click on the graphs to enlarge



Source:

Source:

Source:

A couple weeks ago I had a real treat: a hike with my brother Derrick. This was a treat because I so rarely get to spend time with him (He lives in Arizona, I in Indiana) and also because we went to my favorite trail: The Siphon Draw trail to the top of the Superstitions mountains.  The trail is about 15 miles east of Mesa. The projection you see to the right  is called the Flatiron, because it juts out in the shape of an upside-down iron.  It commands an incredible view of the valley, and from here you can see not only Mesa but even downtown Phoenix.  The elevation of the Flatiron is just under 5000 feet, so it is actually a very difficult climb. The last third is akin to climbing 1500 stairs.

Anyway, we made it, and here are some pics from one of my favorite days of the last year. I notice that if you are using the some web browsers, the pics are compressed horizontally on this page. Just click on one to see it with a better aspect ratio.

This is approaching the superstition mountains from Mesa. The Flatiron is the peak directly above the lane we are driving in.

Derrick looking cool about a third of the way up.

Some of the landscape on the hike.

Taking a break about half-way up.

Derrick working on his tan. Did I mention the temp was in the low 50′s?

Snow in southern Arizona. At least a little snow.

approaching the Flatiron. I wasn’t trying to get the cool lighting effects; it just happened.

Derrick at the top of the Flatiron.

Me at the top. The camera is facing north.

part of the Phoenix valley. Looks a lot cooler in person, of course.

On top of the Flatiron. The rocks in the background are the actual peak of the Superstitions.  We didn’t have time to hike them. I would guess they were another 300 feet up or so.

Closer view of the summit rocks. The ones on the right are blackened by a recent, tragic small plane crash.

Derrick getting ready for the trip back down.

Good view of the Flatiron from the way down.  Derrick is saying, “I Can’t believe we actually climbed that”.

Almost at the bottom, the setting sun shines on the lower peaks of the Superstition mountains.

One more of the same.

Note: I am not a political person.  But the education proposals being discussed in Indiana affect all of us in this state, so I thought I would put my take on it here.

Amid all the details, one salient feature dominates the Governor’s proposed changes in education.  That feature is raising the stakes on standardized testing.  Students and teachers alike will face stiffer penalties for the student not “achieving” a certain score on a state-wide test.  Students, for example, will need to repeat third grade if they cannot reach a certain score on the third grade reading test.  And though the details are still being worked out, it is clear that the Governor wants to tie teacher (and principal) pay and employment to test numbers as well (specifically, tests in reading, writing, and math).

What has not been discussed by the Governor or his ally, Mr. Bennett, is the law of unintended consequences.  Indeed, they act as if they had never heard of the principle, or if their ideas were somehow immune to its effects.

Briefly put, the law of unintended consequences is the common-sense notion that even our best-intentioned plans often have significant unintended and negative side-effects.  This is especially true when the plans are political.  Professor Andrew Gelman notes, The law of unintended consequences is what happens when a simple system tries to regulate a complex system.   The political system is simple… Society in contrast is a complex, evolving, high-feedback, incentive-driven system.  When a simple system tries to regulate a complex system you often get unintended consequences.

Prohibition is a classic example here, but only one of a myriad.  The three-strike laws provide another example; intended to be tough on criminals, the laws actually encourage them to murder people to avoid getting caught, as the sentence for murder is no worse than the consequences of being caught for the third time.

U.S. Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan has already recognized this in the effects of No Child Left Behind.  He said his organization wants to get away from their reputation as a “compliance-driven bureaucracy” and strive toward being an “engine of innovation”, noting “We all agree that NCLB has many flaws, from mislabeling to overreach to lowering standards.”

Here are some of the effects of NCLB’s insistence that schools have a certain percentage of their students pass standardized tests (in reading, math, and writing) or face harsh consequences.  These effects will be exacerbated under the Governor’s plan to raise the stakes of standardized testing.

First, the bubble effect.  To understand this, imagine yourself as a teacher or principal in a school where, in order to not face penalties, 70% of students must hit a certain level on a standardized test.  Say the cut-off for passing this test is 35 out of 50.  That is, if a student gets 35 or more questions out of 50 correct, then that student “passes”.  It makes no difference if a student gets 35 or 50, nor is 34 any different than 0.  And it also makes no difference what a students score is compared to what it was a year ago.  Where, as a teacher, under immense and growing pressure to get a certain percentage of students to get a 35, are you going to focus your work?  Obviously, on the students who are just below making the cut.  The students on the complete bottom are a lost cause, while those in the top will pass anyway.  The system is set up to almost guarantee focusing on the bubble kids while ignoring the others.

The second unintended consequence is the narrowing of educational goals. Phi Kappa Delta, the highly respected national association of professional educators, has developed a list of 18 goals of education.  Among the most important are these:

• Developing good character and self-respect
• Develop skills in reading, writing, speaking and listening
• Develop a desire to learn now and in the future
• Learn to respect and get along with the people with whom we work and live
• Develop pride in work and feelings of self-worth

When, however, carrots and sticks are applied to only One Goal (passing a test), then the message that both teachers and students hear is that the other goals are options, to be jettisoned when they conflict with the One Goal.  It takes little imagination to think of the long-term adverse effects on society if these other goals are neglected.  As Theodore Roosevelt has said, “to educate someone in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society”.

The third unintended consequence is the narrowing of subjects taught.  In a survey of 300 school districts by the Center on Education Policy, 71% of local administrators admitted that subjects other than math, reading and writing were being reduced at the Elementary level in their districts under NCLB.  Again, this would only be magnified under the even higher stakes of the Governor’s proposals.  And, indeed, how can we expect otherwise?  If a teacher is told their pay or even their job is dependent on their student’s scores in those three subjects, what is the rational choice for that teacher to make?  Of course history, geography, music, art, social studies, and even science will fall through the cracks. Of course their will be less time for PE, recess, or even teacher-student bonding.  And of course this will affect the student’s feelings about school (a huge motivator) but also his or her preparedness to be a thoughtful citizen in this world.

Other unintended consequences of the Governor’s plan can be summed up more briefly:

• Special Education students will, contrary to recommendations of almost all theorists, be pushed to be excluded from the main classroom (and thus from the testing mandates). This can be demoralizing; already under NCLB the drop-out rate of Special Ed students has increased.
• Teachers will be under intense pressure to cheat on the tests, often in subtle ways.  This is not to say that most would give in.  It is to say that we are asking a lot of human nature.
• Teachers will also be under increased pressure to “teach to the test”, that is, focus their method of instruction on what will help the students learn the information likely to be covered on the test, rather than creatively trying to convey the meaning, scope and wonder of the subject.
• Teachers will be less likely to cooperate and collaborate with other teachers on their grade level, since other teachers would now be the “competition” for the best test scores.
• Field trips, science fairs, or anything else that takes a fair amount of time will be reduced or eliminated.  Even things like home-made valentines and school-wide Christmas programs may become a thing of the past.
• Students will be forced to repeat a grade based on a test, rather than the evaluation of the teacher, principal, and parent.  The American Psychological Association and the American Education Research Council have both concluded it is damaging to a child to base retention or graduation decisions on an individual test.

Problems like these are already being recognized among those with the most schooling. A Pew Research poll found 64% of college graduates say NCLB places too much emphasis on standardized testing, while, interestingly, only 32% of those with a high school education or less say the same thing.  Thus, while most educated people agree with the Secretary Duncan’s move to de-emphasize “compliance-driven bureaucracy”, the Governor’s plan is moving in the exact opposite direction.

I agree with Paul Wellstone, the late Senator from Minnesota, who said this: “Making students accountable for test scores works well on a bumper sticker, and it allows many politicians to look good by saying that they will not tolerate failure. But it represents a hollow promise. Far from improving education, high-stakes testing marks a major retreat from fairness, from accuracy, from quality, and from equity.”

When all is said and done, the unintended negative consequences may dwarf any temporary benefits.  For the students, school will increasingly be about learning how to pass an exam, rather than instilling critical judgment and a love for learning. It would be a shame if we ended up with a generation of students a little better at taking tests, yet less able and willing to actually think.

Yesterday my friend Mike published a well-written post on internetmonk. It was a commentary on a planned 600 acre amusement park based on Noah’s ark. The tone was…biting. Check it out here:

http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/the-disney-ization-of-faith

The post gathered over 300 comments, some of which took issue with Mike’s satire.  At one Mike defended himself by saying the post was not satire, but “prophetic ridicule”  When I first saw this, I felt he was making up a new genre.  My High School English teacher never told us about that one. But after thinking about it, I agreed with Mike.  It was something like the prophets would do.

In any case, I wanted to mention it here to point out what I think is a very good piece of writing in a very difficult genre.  The point of prophetic ridicule, as I take it anyway, is to show the utter folly of some plan or action by using humor and sarcasm, for the good of the one who is a target of that humor and sarcasm (as well as any other readers who may be tempted to emulate the target).  This is completely different than the way the world normally uses sarcasm and ridicule: to denigrate and mock the other person out of contempt, hatred, or a feeling of superiority, with the goal of hurting that person.  The world’s way is much easier.  True prophetic ridicule is as tough as it gets.  The one using it must not only temper their words by  love for the other (even while hating  what they are doing), but will also have to put with much whining from those who equate love with being “nice”.

I hope you read Mike’s post.  Perhaps it is not perfect, but it accomplishes true prophetic ridicule better than anything I’ve seen for a long time. It is also superb in the way it analyzes the theme park with a motif (the disneyization of Christianity) and carries that motif through the end.

My friend Kevin suggested I check out a new songs by Christy Nockels. This is fantastic. Turn up the speakers and worship!