dean has left the building...

we moved! i'm a wordpress guy now, completely by accident. if you have me linked or bookmarked, the new URL is:

http://deancirelli.com

look forward to seeing everybody at the new digs...

a personal revolution

in the past month or so, i've written 2 articles for a series at monticello live entitled "churches in transition." i was quite surprised, and rather unprepared, for the comments that one of the articles generated... in both the quantity and the forcefulness of some of the opinions that were articulated. one commenter in particular, a fellow named wade, had some serious issues, not just with the church that was featured in that particular story, but with churches in general, concerning the way money is spent. because i was the author of the article in question, i felt i needed to stay neutral in my response to wade's concerns. i had advised him in my comments to take up the invitation of a member of that church to come and visit, and judge for himself if his concerns were legitimate or not. however, i've been haunted ever since then by the issues that wade brought up, and decided that here at my personal blog would be the appropriate place to comment more specifically...

let me say right up front, as i researched this, my world was literally turned upside down. i had a general awareness of the situation, but when i looked at the specifics, i was dumbfounded... and the more i thought things through, the more i realized that i was about to undergo a huge transformation in the way i look at the local church's role in Kingdom work.

this may be comparing apples and oranges, or even watermelons and grapes, but i firmly believe this is at least a good starting point for making meaningful change in the way churches allocate their resources for ministering in the community and the world. i am involved with a ministry called Compassion International, and i am also very familiar with the ministry of World Vision, another Christian child advocacy group. these two organizations minister to children all over the world, primarily through child sponsorship, and also through emergency aid for tsunami victims, sanitary water initiatives, malaria intervention and AIDS initiatives, just to name a few. these would be tremendous burdens to take on just here in the united states, but these organizations have a huge impact here and around the globe... and they do it by spending upwards of EIGHTY PERCENT of their funds on programs that directly affect those whom they seek to minister to. compassion international spends 84% of its money ministering to children, just under 8% for administrative costs, and just over 8% for fundraising... world vision spends 87% directly on ministry to children, 5% administrative and 8% fundraising.

because of these percentages, both of these ministries are recognized for their financial integrity by such groups as the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA), the Better Business Bureau Wise Giving Alliance, and Charity Navigator. these are figures i've known about for years, and reasons why i place so much trust in how these ministries go about fulfilling their mission.

now then, after being totally convicted by the issues that were raised by wade over at monticello live, i did a little figuring, and here is what i have discovered (about one individual church, which shall remain anonymous), based on receipts and expenditures from january through may of this year... these percentages will obviously vary from one local church to another, although i suspect the variances will not be all that great. 13% of money taken in went toward missions and ministry (i included money spent on sunday school and discipleship training, which is mostly spent on church members, but giving the benefit of the doubt, i figure if a church is teaching the bible to its members, that in turn should at least partially translate into ministry in the community and the world at large, ideally speaking)... and 87% went toward administrative (basically payroll, physical plant and supplies). these percentages are very similar to what i found at compassion international and world vision, except for one little difference... THEY ARE COMPLETELY BACKWARDS. "so, what is the possibility," i wondered, "that these figures were skewed, perhaps because income fell short of expectations?" i decided to look at what was actually budgeted for missions/ministry vs. administrative to get a better idea of intent. well, i was right, the figures were skewed a bit. missions and ministry-related items, again into which i included amounts budgeted for the education program, account for 16.4% of the budget. which means that the remaining 83.6% was budgeted for expenses related to payroll, building upkeep, and supplies.

i've turned this over and over in my head in the weeks since i first looked at this. i've slept on it, and i've lost sleep over it. i've processed it, i've ranted and raved about it, i've prayed about it. and i've come to one conclusion... IT IS INEXCUSABLE, AND IT IS INDEFENSIBLE. the first thing i've had to do was personally repent of this myself, because for years as a church member and as a staff member, i bought right into this system... CONTRIBUTED to this system with my tithes, and helped LEGITIMIZE this system by taking a paycheck from it for 13 years. the thing i must do now is try to be part of the SOLUTION to the problem... by SPEAKING OUT about it, and by PUTTING MY MONEY WHERE MY MOUTH IS.

this one thing i do know... any organization is going to show what its priorities are by where it puts its money. charities like compassion and world vision have made ministry to children their top priority, and they show it by spending upwards of 87% of their money on programs that directly benefit children around the world. most of their money goes directly toward what they are most passionate about. what then does it say about churches when the vast majority of their money goes toward paying their staff and keeping up their buildings? no organization, no charity, should ever exist for the sole purpose of self-maintenance. the notion is absurd and in regards to the Church, it is downright sinful. yet, the very fact that over 80% of a church's money is spent on itself, tells me that the command of Jesus to go and make disciples of all nations has taken a back seat to self-interest.

i will say that i dont believe that churches first start out with the thought in mind that their mission in this world is to build fancy buildings (especially not to go into debt to do so) and maintain a large payroll. but as time goes by, they lose focus and they become image-conscious... for all the wrong reasons. churches SHOULD be concerned about the image they convey... but that image should be one of dying to self rather than serving self. as i said earlier, i dont know if it's fair to make the comparison between the church and charities like compassion or world vision. and maybe the 80% standard is an unrealistic expectation for churches. however, just as we as individual believers know that we can never live a perfect life as Christ did, we still strive to be Christ-like, so i would venture to say that even if spending 80% or more on missions and ministry is an impossible goal for a church to achieve (and i'm nowhere near convinced that it's impossible at all), it's at least something the church should strive for. if somebody can show me where i'm going wrong here, i'd be more than happy to listen. but are there any churches out there that have even a 51-49% breakdown of missions/ministry vs. administrative? is any church spending more on being missional than they are on themselves?

i know it's unrealistic to all at once go from spending 80-plus percent on yourself to spending it on reaching people for Christ, but we need to start the ball rolling now if meaningful change is ever going to occur. even in my own personal giving, it's going to take time to adjust, but my goal is to spend more on ministry and missions than i do on myself.

how will churches manage this undertaking, if they even choose to try? i honestly believe the solution lies in something that is a foreign notion to the church. i've even had to swallow hard on this one, but in order for the Kingdom to increase, churches are going to have to decrease (in size that is). to get bigger Kingdom-wise, we're going to have to get smaller beauracracy-wise. churches are going to have to deconstruct and shift the focus in the direction of empowering their small groups to initiate and take ownership of the ministries of the church. it may even mean the house church model for some. this goes against everything i ever learned in seminary. i've had classes in which i was instructed on how to manage and maneuver through layers of church administration. i've sat in youth ministry classes and had professors tell me what i should expect to be paid, and not to accept a penny less. i'm having to throw this type of thinking out the window.

this morning i broke away from writing this to transport one of our kids to his job, and on the way back i ended up being part of a bible study at dad's place. during that bible study, we talked about God interrupting our lives, and i must tell you, God used a guy named wade to interrupt mine. it's been over 3 weeks since he raised these issues, and my way of thinking about ministry and the Church has been completely upended. i suspect i'm not going to make very many friends over this, and i hope i dont lose any of the ones i have, but i'm completely sold out to this. if ministries of the scope and size of compassion and world vision are able to get a handle on this concept... the concept that the bulk of their resources must be designated to doing ministry... then i feel certain that on the local church level it can, and must, be accomplished.

just how should a church grow, anyway?

while i was busy biting off almost more than i could chew renovating the kitchen at our cottage, i had plenty of time to ruminate on a few things (btw, i'd post some pics of the new kitchen, but since i didnt bother to take any "before" shots, it's kind of pointless).

ever since reading the barna book "revolution" i've begun to take an interest in the house church movement here in america. i've had a great interest in cell groups for quite a number of years, and still lean slightly toward that method, but the house church intrigues me. as i've compared and contrasted the two, i've also been forced to re-evaluate my position on worship (or celebration) services as well.

i'm a contemporary praise and worship guy... i'll get that out right up front. there are a handful of hymns that are very meaningful to me, but by and large, contemporary praise music does it for me (please understand that i realize that hymns are sung in order to praise and worship Jesus... i'm using those labels to differentiate between the different types and styles of "church" music).

the main reason why i (so far) prefer cell groups (small groups that meet in church members' houses in various neighborhoods, but are a part of a larger church body) to house churches (small groups that meet in church members' homes that are self-contained churches) is that there are more resources available for ministry and missions in the larger corporate body.

the way it works in a cell church is that the church grows through the small groups. the intimacy and community that is fostered in small, neighborhood groups is more conducive to bringing seekers into contact with believers, and ultimately into contact with Christ Himself. usually, on sunday morning, the folks that make up the cell groups gather together corporately for a worship (celebration) service.

traditional churches also have small group meetings... most of these are known as sunday school classes, and they meet right there in the church building, most commonly right before the sunday morning worship service. in southern baptist churches, and probably in a number of other denominations as well, the sunday school is seen as the growth arm of the church (for the same reasons that cell groups are). i realize that when some folks see "church growth," they'll read "mega-church." please understand that church growth is important to me because i know each one of those numbers represents a living, breathing human being that is loved by a Heavenly Father who desires that they come to a saving knowledge of His son, Jesus Christ. honestly, i could care less about being a part of a mega-church.

now, there are a lot of opinions about how a sunday worship service should look, sound and feel. all over the country, and all over the world for that matter, there are churches that struggle with this issue. many proponents of a contemporary worship service would tell us that contemporary music and cutting edge video are necessary to attract folks to church these days. but as i listened to some folks expound on this subject, a contradiction was brought to my attention that i simply cannot ignore, thus the reason for my above-mentioned re-evaluation of how we "worship."

if we're going to buy into the idea that growth happens in the small group settings, whether they be cell groups or sunday school classes, how can we also say that the things we do or dont do in the worship service are necessary to attract the unchurched? can we have it both ways? if we're going to design worship services with the idea in mind that we're going to appeal to a media-savvy, hi-tech generation of lost people, then what's the point of having small groups? if we believe that the community and comaraderie of the small group is the thing that our lost neighbors initially find attractive about the church, then why all the fuss about the structure of the worship celebration as a means to reach the lost?

i've come (back) to the realization that the worship service is for the believers. how can our lost friends worship Someone they do not know or believe in?? they can't! so, why do we go to such great pains to design a way of worship for those who CANNOT worship? of course i know that this doesnt solve the problem of whether we worship traditionally or contemporarily, because churches still have diversity within the body of believers. but at least we can stop the charade of claiming to be trying to reach lost people by way of the style in which we choose to conduct our worship services. this is where i believe the house church may have the advantage. it isnt just an intimate setting of a small bible study group, but it is also the intimate setting of the very church body itself. and perhaps avoiding the turmoil over the style of worship in the larger setting just may be worth the trade-off of having not quite as many resources with which to do Kingdom work.

check out my new favorite website, which describes perfectly how i believe we ought to be doing church... and how we should have been doing it all along...

what is it exactly that God is supposed to have done, and how does He feel about getting blamed for it?

so what's in a name?

i came across these 2 signs while traveling out of state this weekend...



used to be that politicians waited until you elected them before they showed their true colors.



while the statement on this sign is certainly true, this pastor's last name may belie his real motives.

what hath we wrought?

i figure this is a pretty cut-and-dried kind of a concept...

"The man said,
'This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called 'woman,'
for she was taken out of man.'
For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh." (Genesis 2:23-24)

and for those who like to believe that the old testament is no longer relevant today, particularly to the topic at hand, i offer up this new testament passage wherein Jesus Himself thought it was important enough to quote from genesis...

"Haven't you read,' he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." (Matthew 19: 4-5)

so, what's all the fuss about? just a little news item that, i think, merits more air time than it's been getting... definitely more than paris hilton going to jail or lindsay lohan's new movie coming out (priorities, priorities). the ramifications of this case are going to have a significant impact on family law (and the re-defining of the term "family") for years to come. the gist of the matter is that a lesbian couple (well, former couple, as they've gone their separate ways) utilized the services of a male acquaintance as a sperm donor in order to have a couple of children. after the break-up, a court ordered the ex-partner of the birth mother to pay $1,000 a month in child support. in response to that order, the partner sought to have the court force the sperm donor to ante up. the court said no, but an appellate court overturned that decision. compounding the problem now is the fact that the sperm donor died, so if the case can be made that the donor is on the hook for support, there will be social security survivor benefits available to pay child support from.

so, back to the scriptures above. it's become rather commonplace for lesbian couples to decide they want to have children "of their own" even though that is physically impossible. so the next best thing is to employ the services of someone with the necessary equipment to get the job done. the article states that the sperm donor "helped" the couple conceive. helped?? a lesbian couple CANNOT conceive, no matter how much "help" they get. two women cannot conceive children together, so this takes our donor out of the "helper" category. the DONOR and the BIRTH MOTHER conceived the children plain and simple. its' also interesting to note that the article stated that "the process was very informal. the birth mother was inseminated at home." what does that mean exactly? i doubt that fertility doctors make house calls, so there's a lot of speculation as to just how informal a "procedure" it was. anyhow, the whole episode smacks of sexual immorality, with more than just a little bit of greed thrown in for good measure.

with all the redneck comments concerning "adam and steve" aside, there is just no validation for homosexual relationships, homosexual civil unions or homosexual marriages in the bible. pro-homosexual "theologians" have to do all sorts of translational acrobatics to make the case for it. and there's plenty of good reason for why these relationships are unhealthy. even a plumber can explain one of the most practical reasons. but look at where we find ourselves at this juncture in time because of the pandora's box that was opened when society started to embrace this monstrosity. the excuses and justifications all started out with "what happens between 2 consenting adults is nobody else's business." well, that one didn't pan out too well, did it? now same-sex couples are demanding the right to adopt children, so the circle widens to include children. then same-sex partners wanted to be able to "have" children of their own, and the circle widens even more to include the person who fathers these children. and in the process, when things go wrong, the courts become involved, then the media. also, by virtue of the fact that the male participant in this fiasco is now deceased, we're all pulled into the circle because if this case is decided in favor of the partner that brought this suit, our dwindling social security pool will be dipped into for the support of the 2 children. so much for "what happens between 2 consenting adults is nobody else's business." now it's what happens among three consenting adults, and there are children involved who didn't have any say in the matter at all. the donor just figured he would make his one-time contribution and fade quietly into the background (although in this case, because he was already an acquaintance, he managed to insinuate himself into the "family" dynamic to the point where the children were not only aware of him, but knew he was their biological father. and according to court records, he spent thousands on toys and clothing for them). and in the end, we all pay financially, but more importantly, the moral fabric of our society gets shredded a little bit more.

one of the many thorny issues this has raised for the courts to figure out is that there are THREE parental figures involved, whereas most states' custody and support laws are written, and rightly so, under the assumption that there are only TWO parents. additionally, without having first-hand knowledge of what was going through the mind of the non-birth-parent partner in the case at hand, it seems that she decided that her responsibility as a "parent" only went as far as her commitment to the relationship she was in. when that was over and she got tagged for child support, she started looking for somebody else to foot the bill. so now the very foundation of the traditional family, not to mention family law, has been turned upside down, and no one is quite sure how to proceed or where this will all end up.

there is no provision in God's word for a) same sex unions, and b) third party participation in pro-creation. however, this whole third party business is not exclusive to same-sex relationships. what about heterosexual couples that cannot conceive children in the traditional way? same thing as far as i can tell. i just dont believe God is honored or glorified when a wife has sperm placed inside of her from a man that is not her husband. i dont have a problem with in-vitro fertilization or medically-assisted insemination where the husband's sperm is used to impregnate his wife when, for whatever reasons, the wife cannot become pregnant through normal sexual relations. but there is just no place within a marriage for the introduction of a third person's genes, chromosomes and DNA. surrogate mothers? no to that, too. there is a mountain of court proceedings which tell us that many donors and surrogates at some point begin to feel a bond with the children they created, and what at first seemed like a simple, even impersonal "contribution" turns into a nightmare for all involved. as can be seen in the account of abraham, sarah and hagar, the wife who cannot conceive can often be adversely affected as well.

many people claim that the Word of God is outmoded, archaic and impractical for application in a modern society. God is not an idiot. He knew and knows what's best for mankind. while we may believe we know better, a quick perusal of the headlines would tell us that left to our own devices, we have little to contribute other than chaos and confusion.

the height of irresponsibility

on friday (april 20), our young girls cottage went to see "disney on ice" at alltel arena in little rock. what the houseparents told me when they returned really disturbed me, although i suppose i shouldnt have been too shocked, all things considered. well, after being absolutely snowed under with work for the past few weeks, i finally had time to call alltel today, only to discover that the person i need to speak with is on vacation until the 10th of may. but in the meantime, here's my problem...

somebody (and i'm assuming it's the person, based on what i was told by the gentleman who answered the phone, who will return my call as her voice mail promised), in their infinite wisdom, thought it would be a good idea to sell beer at this obviously child-oriented event. maybe i've gotten way too used to living in dry counties (almost 5 years in drew county, and prior to that, 4+ years in monroe county, MS), but this is inexcusable. yes, the folks that purchased the alcohol were (hopefully) adults, although i question the wisdom and capacity for common sense of anyone that would pay upwards of $4 for a cup of beer. and yes, no law was broken by the sale of beer at this event... that is assuming that they carded those who looked to be of questionable age, and again assuming no minors consumed or came to be in possession of alcohol sold at the arena.

i would venture to say that upwards of, what... 98% of the adults present were there because they took their kid(s) to see the show (yup, i personally know of a few adults that would have gone just because they love disney). now, i'm reasonably certain that very few, if any, folks went to "disney on ice" for the sole purpose of getting loaded (as i said, 4 bucks for a cup of beer... you can get your buzz on far more cost-effectively by buying a 12-pack at wal-mart, which is beside the point)... but in the 2+ hours that most folks would have been there, you can quaff a few brews. according to most studies, a 170 lb. male could achieve a .08 BAC (the legal limit in arkansas) by drinking 4 beers in an hour on an empty stomach... a 137 lb. female needs 3 in an hour. in a 2 hour span, the male needs 5 beers and the female 4.

i wont have the official information until the concession manager returns my call, but the houseparent told me that the cups appeared to be as large as a "dad's size" drink from dad's place... which would be 24 oz... so 2 of these in an hour would do it for the average male. but there's more to this than .08 BAC. according to the national highway traffic safety administration, "the risk of being in a crash rises at each BAC level" leading up to .08 BAC.

so my question is this: who is responsible for allowing alcohol to be sold at an event where the vast majority of those present are children... children who are relying on potentially impaired adults to get them safely home? alltel arena is owned and operated by the Multi-Purpose Civic Center Facilities Board, a joint entity of pulaski county and (presumably) the city of north little rock. so a government entity is allowing the sale and consumption of alcohol where children are present and either directly or indirectly affected.

i've considered different arguments and scenarios here... that any parent could get drunk at home and load the kids up in the car; that some drunk who just left his favorite bar could barrel down the street and strike a kid on her bike... blah, blah, blah. a county/municipal agency has in place a policy that puts children and adults at risk, and THAT is the height of irresponsibility!

(when ms. debbie johnson, concessions manager for alltel arena comes back from vacation and returns my phone call, i'll post a follow up.)

all i really need to know i learned from a guy with a violin... at rush hour... in a train station

back in january, the washington post set up a grand experiment. they wanted to know: do we have time for beauty? do we even recognize it when it's right there in front of us? to find out, they sent one of the world's greatest violinists - joshua bell - to play some of the world's most beautiful music - bach's "chaconne", schubert's "ave maria" among others - on one of the world's most exquisite instruments - a $3.5 million, 1713 stradivarius - during rush hour in a train station right smack-dab in the hub of our nation's capital... l'enfant plaza station. they set up a hidden camera to catch the action, and even did interviews with those who actually stopped to listen or at least throw in a few bucks as they hurried by. 43 minutes and 1,100 passersby later, bell placed his strad back in it's case and left the number crunching to the post reporters. a great friend of mine sent me a link to the article (replete with video clips of the occasions when someone would actually react), and while it's a bit long, it was a fascinating read for me, and chock full of parallels and comparisons to how we do and dont relate to God, and He to us...

some observations: (excerpts from the post article in italics)

• "It was all videotaped by a hidden camera. You can play the recording once or 15 times, and it never gets any easier to watch. Try speeding it up, and it becomes one of those herky-jerky World War I-era silent newsreels. The people scurry by in comical little hops and starts, cups of coffee in their hands, cellphones at their ears, ID tags slapping at their bellies, a grim danse macabre to indifference, inertia and the dingy, gray rush of modernity. Even at this accelerated pace, though, the fiddler's movements remain fluid and graceful; he seems so apart from his audience -- unseen, unheard, otherworldly -- that you find yourself thinking that he's not really there. A ghost."

oh, my... we can be an indifferent lot, can't we! how often do we find ourselves immersed in our routines, totally oblivious to God's handiwork all around us. so much to do, so little time to do it in. and yet God has surrounded us with the magnificence of His creation. He wants us to enjoy it, and even more, He wants us to see Him in it... that's what He put it here for. and the crowning achievement? US! PEOPLE! created in His image. He wants us to enjoy each other... have fellowship one with another, and yet we're just so darned busy! more importantly, He longs for us to have fellowship with Him, yet many often regard him in much the same way as the musician in the train station appeared to be: "unseen, unheard, otherworldly... He's not really (t)here." oh, but He IS HERE! and He longs for us to take the time to know Him and spend time with Him... but we just hurry on by, too consumed with the things we've chosen to clutter our lives with. no, He's no ghost; He is real and alive and He loves you and me and desires a relationship with us!

• With "Chaconne," the opening is filled with a building sense of awe. That kept him busy for a while. Eventually, though, he began to steal a sidelong glance. "It was a strange feeling, that people were actually, ah . . ." The word doesn't come easily. ". . . ignoring me."

i wonder... how often do we ignore God? how does He feel when we do? i dont think for a minute that whatever He feels is so strange at all. i think it's painfully familiar in fact. the Bible says He created us for fellowship with Him! how would we feel if our spouses, our parents, our children or our best friends just quit calling or coming around? how would we feel if we knew that we rarely, if ever, even crossed their minds anymore? how would we feel if we wrote them a heartfelt love letter and they just pitched it on a shelf somewhere, partially read or maybe not even opened at all, and they were just vaguely aware that it was even in the house? when i think about where God sometimes ends up in my day-to-day, these thoughts get a little too close for comfort.

• "Mark Leithauser... a senior curator at the National Gallery... oversees the framing of the paintings. Leithauser thinks he has some idea of what happened at that Metro station. 'Let's say I took one of our more abstract masterpieces, say an Ellsworth Kelly, and removed it from its frame, marched it... into a restaurant. It's a $5 million painting. And it's one of those restaurants where there are pieces of original art for sale, by some industrious kids from the Corcoran School, and I hang that Kelly on the wall with a price tag of $150. No one is going to notice it. An art curator might look up and say: 'Hey, that looks a little like an Ellsworth Kelly. Please pass the salt.' Leithauser's point is that we shouldn't be too ready to label the Metro passersby unsophisticated boobs. Context matters."

"context matters." that one stung a bit, because i seem to have this problem... when i'm used to seeing people in a certain context (most notably at church) that i dont see on a daily basis, , and then i see them at, say, wal-mart in the middle of the week, i sometimes have a problem remembering where i know them from or why i know them. very awkward. maybe that makes me an unsophisticated boob, but i always go away from those encounters feeling rather inadequate, that i somehow missed the chance to be a blessing to that person, because i get very vague and ambiguous at that point and dont go into specifics lest i say something totally out of left field. on a larger scale though, i dont think context should matter when it comes to God, at least not for the Christian. we should recognize Him for who He is no matter where we are. unfortunately, some folks have Him confined to certain places (the church building) at certain times (sunday, maybe wednesday). they compartmentalize God, never considering that He's the Creator of all that surrounds us, or that He's very active and involved in the world even today! and along with that comes the compartmentalization of faith. people have their "sunday" lives, and then they have their "rest of the week" lives. if we arent living our daily lives in light of what we believe... in light of what the One we believe in did for us on that cross, we live empty and meaningless lives, and much like those that walked right by the master violinist, we will miss out on the extraordinary blessings that the Master wants to bestow upon us.

• "White guy, khakis, leather jacket, briefcase. Early 30s. John David Mortensen is on the final leg of his daily bus-to-Metro commute from Reston. He's heading up the escalator. It's a long ride -- 1 minute and 15 seconds if you don't walk. So, like most everyone who passes Bell this day, Mortensen gets a good earful of music before he has his first look at the musician. Like most of them, he notes that it sounds pretty good. But like very few of them, when he gets to the top, he doesn't race past as though Bell were some nuisance to be avoided. Mortensen is that first person to stop, that guy at the six-minute mark... On the video, you can see Mortensen get off the escalator and look around. He locates the violinist, stops, walks away but then is drawn back. He checks the time on his cellphone -- he's three minutes early for work -- then settles against a wall to listen... Mortensen doesn't know classical music at all; classic rock is as close as he comes. But there's something about what he's hearing that he really likes... 'Whatever it was,' he says, 'it made me feel at peace.'

there are times when the call of God is just... irresistible. one of the greatest things (besides giving His Son to die for the sin of the world) that God ever did for man was to give him free will. it's also one of the most tragic parts of life... when man uses his free will to resist God's beckoning. for some there is the struggle, and eternal life hangs in the balance as the struggle plays out. as with our mr. mortensen, there are those who struggle with God, and finally realizing a good thing when they see it, they give up the struggle and they partake of God's goodness and grace. there is a peace for us as we find refuge in the mercies of the Father.

• "After 'Chaconne,' it is Franz Schubert's 'Ave Maria'... A couple of minutes into it, something revealing happens. A woman and her preschooler (Sheron and Evan Parker) emerge from the escalator. The woman is walking briskly and, therefore, so is the child... 'There was a musician,' Parker says, 'and my son was intrigued. He wanted to pull over and listen, but I was rushed for time.' So Parker does what she has to do. She deftly moves her body between Evan's and Bell's, cutting off her son's line of sight. As they exit the arcade, Evan can still be seen craning to look... The behavior of one demographic remained absolutely consistent. Every single time a child walked past, he or she tried to stop and watch. And every single time, a parent scooted the kid away."

do you remember child-like faith? many believers came to faith in Christ when they were literally children... others as adults. i fall into the latter camp, but even though i was an adult, i had faith like a child. i was downright giddy at times! i was excited about my new-found faith and i wanted to tell everybody about it, and i wanted to draw as near to Jesus as i could. but occasionally, there are people in our lives, sometimes well-meaning people, that for a variety of reasons kind of try to put a damper on the enthusiasm of new believers and even seekers... "hey there now, no reason to get carried away with this Jesus thing..." or "there are too many other things in this life to worry about; no time for God." some of these folks are not believers themselves, and they try to "save" others from falling into some religion trap, and sadly, some are (or claim to be) Christians, but they've left their first love; the fire has gone dim and they're jaded. to his credit, little evan parker tried to make a connection with the violinist right up until the moment he was whisked through the door and out of the plaza. dont let anyone sidetrack you from the things of God! crane your neck! never take your eyes off of Him! if you do, or if you have... He's not going anywhere. and just like Jesus' parents did when He was 12 years old, you'll find Him right where you left Him.

• "A hundred feet away, across the arcade, was the lottery line, sometimes five or six people long... But no one (turned around). Not in the entire 43 minutes. They just shuffled forward toward that machine spitting out numbers. Eyes on the prize. J.T. Tillman was in that line... he remembers every single number he played that day -- 10 of them, $2 apiece, for a total of $20. He doesn't recall what the violinist was playing, though... 'I didn't think nothing of it,' Tillman says, 'just a guy trying to make a couple of bucks.' Tillman would have given him one or two, he said, but he spent all his cash on lotto. When he is told that he stiffed one of the best musicians in the world, he laughs."

Wherever your treasure is, there your heart will be also. (Matthew 6:21) red letters... Jesus' own words. pretty cut and dried. withholding from God, not just your money (no this isnt going to be a screed against the lottery... although that's a small part of a much bigger issue), but your time, your talents, your thoughts, your deeds, your whole life, is pretty serious business. "eyes on the prize"... the apostle paul talked a lot about the "prize." but the prize he spoke of, and the prize(s) people often strive for, are two entirely different things. folks get caught up in the whole rat race of bigger and better, "gotta keep up with the joneses," and lose sight of what really matters. hearts become hardened to the point where God isnt even a blip on the radar screen. the earthly "prizes"... they're only temporary and they will pass away eventually. so if your treasure consists of the temporal things of this life, then it follows that your heart will be there too. it's the difference between living for yourself and living for the Kingdom, and if your heart is invested in the "stuff" you've accumulated, it's an investment with no eternal dividends.

• "'Yes, I saw the violinist,' Jackie Hessian says, 'but nothing about him struck me as much of anything.' You couldn't tell that by watching her. Hessian was one of those people who gave Bell a long, hard look before walking on. It turns out that she wasn't noticing the music at all. 'I really didn't hear that much,' she said. 'I was just trying to figure out what he was doing there, how does this work for him, can he make much money, would it be better to start with some money in the case, or for it to be empty, so people feel sorry for you? I was analyzing it financially.'"

how often do we spend our time trying to figure God out? we try and fit Him into our little God-box so that we can make sense of him based on our own understanding. and we get so busy trying to figure all the angles, that we fail to hear Him, or we refuse to hear Him because He doesnt meet our expectations. worse yet, there are those who say "nothing about Him strikes me as much of anything," and not only do they put Him into a box, but they try and cram other gods in there with Him (universalism). many folks cannot make logical sense of God and His work in the world... they cant figure Him out, so they dismiss Him. "it's foolishness," "it's a fairytale," "it's a lie," "He would make a whole lot more sense if He were this way instead of that way..." it's not to say that we should switch our intellect off, because our intelligence is God-given. but God is also bigger than what we can comprehend, and there comes a point where we just need to do it the way it's meant to be done... by faith.

well, we're winding down now, and while it may seem that the news is mostly bad, fear not faithful reader! there are 3 more people of note... the last 3 people that paid any attention at all to the man with the violin...

• the cultural hero of the day arrived at l'enfant plaza pretty late, in the unprepossessing figure of one John Picarello... In the video, you see Picarello stop dead in his tracks, locate the source of the music, and then retreat to the other end of the arcade... and he will not budge for the next nine minutes... Of the more than 40 people contacted, Picarello was the only one who immediately mentioned the violinist... '... I've never heard anyone of that caliber. He was technically proficient, with very good phrasing...' On the video, you can see Picarello look around him now and then, almost bewildered. 'Yeah, other people just were not getting it. It just wasn't registering. That was baffling to me.'

• As Picarello stood in the back, Janice Olu arrived and took up a position a few feet away from Bell... She didn't know the name of the piece she was hearing, but she knew the man playing it has a gift. Olu was on a coffee break and stayed as long as she dared. As she turned to go, she whispered to the stranger next to her, 'I really don't want to leave.'

• As it happens, exactly one person recognized Bell, and she didn't arrive until near the very end. For Stacy Furukawa... there was no doubt. She doesn't know much about classical music, but she had been in the audience three weeks earlier, at Bell's free concert at the Library of Congress. And here he was, the international virtuoso, sawing away, begging for money. She had no idea what the heck was going on, but whatever it was, she wasn't about to miss it. Furukawa positioned herself 10 feet away from Bell, front row, center. She had a huge grin on her face. The grin, and Furukawa, remained planted in that spot until the end. "It was the most astonishing thing I've ever seen in Washington," Furukawa says. 'Joshua Bell was standing there playing at rush hour, and people were not stopping, and not even looking, and some were flipping quarters at him! Quarters! '"

so i'm wondering to myself, what would be the spiritual equivalent of "flipping quarters" at one of the most accomplished virtuoso's of our day? would it be putting in an hour (and not a minute more!) at church each sunday just to satisfy an "obligation" for the week? is it putting on a "Christian" persona only out in public? how about tossing a ten in the offering plate and then running out to buy the newest cool gadget... on credit of course? wow! God deserves our all, yet often times He's lucky to get a few scraps here and there. but there are people who get it, just like these last 3 who "got" what was going on in that train station that morning. and when we've tasted of His goodness, when we realize that our sin put Jesus on the cross, but it was His unconditional love for us that held Him there... when we realize that we're the apple of His eye, when He's proven time and again that NO ONE or NOTHING can ever compare to His grace and His mercy, it is indeed totally baffling as to why everyone else cannot or will not see it.

and maybe you don't quite understand or comprehend all of the intricacies of it, but there are those moments when it's just you and Him... those moments of intimacy, those times when you pour your heart out and it seems as if there's nothing or no one at that moment except you and Him, those are the times when you say "i don't want to leave!" peter had a moment like that with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration. i suspect that in those times when Jesus drew away from the crowds just to have time alone with His 12 disciples, they had that same yearning... "we don't want to leave!" but leave we must, for we are to be about our Father's business, and that entails being a presence among the lost of this world. there are sects of monks whose sole purpose is to sequester themselves for a lifetime in isolated monasteries in order to be "close to God." but Jesus knew that while it was important just to get away for a time, the more important part was to live a holy, purposeful life, shining His light in a world of darkness. sometimes we watch God at work, and while we have no idea what he's up to at the time, all we know is, we arent about to miss it!

there are times and places that i know without a doubt that i'm going to encounter my Lord. but what really gets me are the times He shows up when i'm least expecting Him. i've learned that i should never get caught off-guard, yet i'll still stand in awe as He proves Himself one more time. reminds me of the old lifesavers commercial where the little girl and her father are watching a sunset, and right after the sun slips below the horizon, she whispers, "do it again, daddy." i get onto myself sometimes for being so surprised when God comes through, but lately i've come to realize that maybe a good dose of wide-eyed wonder, of childlike faith, is far better than becoming so jaded that i wouldnt recognize my Father at work if i was standing right in front of Him.
yeah... do it again, Daddy!