i100x

"The seed that fell on good soil grew and produced a crop of up to 100x what was planted."

i100x header image 1

Bonhoeffer: We Cannot Plan . . .

August 4th, 2009 · Influencers, Leadership, Spiritual Journey

Dietrich_Bonhoeffer scratching head We have grown up with the experience of our parents and grandparents that people can and must plan, develop, and shape their own lives, and that life has a purpose, about which people must make up their minds, and which they must then pursue with all their strength.

But we have learned by experience that we cannot plan even for the coming day, that what we have built up is being destroyed overnight, and that our life, in contrast to that of our parents, has become formless or even fragmentary. In spite of that, I can only say that I have no wish to live in any other time than our own, even though it is so inconsiderate of our outward well-being.

– Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, p. 157

Comments Off on Bonhoeffer: We Cannot Plan . . .Tags:

Max De Pree: What Is Leadership?

July 30th, 2009 · Influencers, Leadership, Management

The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality. The last is to say thank you. In between the two, the leader must become a servant and a debtor. That sums up the progress of an artful leader.

Concepts of leadership, ideas about leadership, and leadership practices are the subject of much thought, discussion, writing, teaching, and learning. True leaders are sought after and cultivated. Leadership is not an easy subject to explain. A friend of mine characterizes leaders simply like this: “Leaders don’t inflict pain; they bear pain.”

The goal of thinking hard about leadership is not to produce great or charismatic or well-known leaders. The measure of leadership is not the quality of the head, but the tone of the body. The signs of outstanding leadership appear primarily among the followers. Are the followers reaching their potential? Are they learning? Serving? Do they achieve the required results? Do they change with grace? Manage conflict?

I would like to ask you to think about the concept of leadership in a certain way. Try to think about a leader, in the words of the gospel writer Luke, as “one who serves.” Leadership is a concept of owing certain things to the institution. It is a way of thinking about institutional heirs, a way of thinking about stewardship as contrasted with ownership. Robert Greenleaf has written an excellent book about this idea, Servant Leadership.

The art of leadership requires us to think about the leader-as-steward in terms of relationships: of assets and legacy, of momentum and effectiveness, of civility and values.

Leaders should leave behind them assets and a legacy. First, consider assets; certainly leaders owe assets. Leaders owe their institutions vital financial health, and the relationships and reputation that enable continuity of that financial health. Leaders must deliver to their organizations the appropriate services, products, tools, and equipment that people in the organization need in order to be accountable. In many institutions leaders are responsible for providing land and facilities.

But what else do leaders owe? What are artful leaders responsible for? Surely we need to include people. People are the heart and spirit of all that counts. Without people, there is no need for leaders. Leaders can decide to be primarily concerned with leaving assets to their institutional heirs or they can go beyond that and capitalize on the opportunity to leave a legacy, a legacy that takes into account the more difficult, qualitative side of life, one which provides greater meaning, more challenge, and more joy in the lives of those whom leaders enable.

Besides owing assets to their institutions, leaders owe the people in those institutions certain things. Leaders need to be concerned with the institutional value system which, after all, leads to the principles and standards that guide the practices of the people in the institution. Leaders owe a clear statement of the values of the organization. These values should be broadly understood and agreed to and should shape our corporate and individual behavior. What is this value system based on? How is it expressed? How is it audited? These are not easy questions to deal with.

Leaders are also responsible for future leadership. They need to identify, develop, and nurture future leaders.

Leaders are responsible for such things as a sense of quality in the institution, for whether or not the institution is open to influence and open to change. Effective leaders encourage contrary opinions, an important source of vitality. I am talking about how leaders can nurture the roots of an institution, about a sense of continuity, about institutional culture.

Leaders owe a covenant to the corporation or institution, which is, after all, a group of people. Leaders owe the organization a new reference point for what caring, purposeful, committed people can be in the institutional setting. Notice I did not say what people can do — what we can do is merely a consequence of what we can be. Corporations, like the people who compose them, are always in a state of becoming. Covenants bind people together and enable them to meet their corporate needs by meeting the needs of one another. We must do this in a way that is consonant with the world around us.

Leaders owe a certain maturity. Maturity as expressed in a sense of self-worth, a sense of belonging, a sense of expectancy, a sense of responsibility, a sense of accountability, and a sense of equality.

Leaders owe the corporation rationality. Rationality gives reason and mutual understanding to programs and to relationships. It gives visible order. Excellence and commitment and competence are available to us only under the rubric of rationality. A rational environment values trust and human dignity and provides the opportunity for personal development and self-fulfillment in the attainment of the organization’s goals.

Business literacy, understanding the economic basis of a corporation, is essential. Only a group of people who share a body of knowledge and continually learn together can stay vital and viable.

Leaders owe people space, space in the sense of freedom. Freedom in the sense of enabling our gifts to be exercised. We need to give each other the space to grow, to be ourselves, to exercise our diversity. We need to give each other space so that we may both give and receive such beautiful things as ideas, openness, dignity, joy, healing, and inclusion. And in giving each other the gift of space, we need also to offer the gifts of grace and beauty to which each of us is entitled.

Another way to think about what leaders owe is to ask this question: What is it without which this institution would not be what it is?

Leaders are obligated to provide and maintain momentum. Leadership comes with a lot of debts to the future. There are more immediate obligations as well. Momentum is one. Momentum in a vital company is palpable. It is not abstract or mysterious. It is the feeling among a group of people that their lives and work are intertwined and moving toward a recognizable and legitimate goal. It begins with competent leadership and a management team strongly dedicated to aggressive managerial development and opportunities. This team’s job is to provide an environment that allows momentum to gather.

Momentum comes from a clear vision of what the corporation ought to be, from a well-thought-out strategy to achieve that vision, and from carefully conceived and communicated directions and plans that enable everyone to participate and be publicly accountable in achieving those plans.

Momentum depends on a pertinent but flexible research and development program led by people with outstanding gifts and unique talents. Momentum results when a corporation has an aggressive, professional, inspired group of people in its marketing and sales units. Momentum results when the operations group serves its customers in such a way that the customer sees them as their best supplier of tools, equipment, and services. Underlying these complex activities is the e
ssential role of the financial team. They provide the financial guidelines and the necessary ratios. They are responsible for equity among the various groups that compose the corporate family.

Leaders are responsible for effectiveness. Much has been written about effectiveness — some of the best of it by Peter Drucker. He has such a great ability to simplify concepts. One of the things he tells us is that efficiency is doing the thing right, but effectiveness is doing the right thing.

Leaders can delegate efficiency, but they must deal personally with effectiveness. Of course, the natural question is ?how.? We could fill many pages dealing with how to be effective, but I would like to touch on just two ways.

The first is the understanding that effectiveness comes about through enabling others to reach their potential — both their personal potential and their corporate or institutional potential.

In some South Pacific cultures, a speaker holds a conch shell as a symbol of a temporary position of authority. Leaders must understand who holds the conch ? that is, who should be listened to and when. This makes it possible for people to use their gifts to the fullest for the benefit of everyone.

Sometimes, to be sure, a leader must choose who is to speak. That is part of the risk of leadership. A leader must assess capability. A leader must be a judge of people. For leaders choose a person, not a position.

Another way to improve effectiveness is to encourage roving leadership. Roving leadership arises and expresses itself at varying times and in varying situations, according to the dictates of those situations. Roving leaders have the special gifts or the special strengths or the special temperament to lead in these special situations. They are acknowledged by others who are ready to follow them.

Leaders must take a role in developing, expressing, and defending civility and values. In a civilized institution or corporation, we see good manners, respect for persons, an understanding of “good goods,” and an appreciation of the way in which we serve each other.

Civility has to do with identifying values as opposed to following fashions. Civility might be defined as an ability to distinguish between what is actually healthy and what merely appears to be living. A leader can tell the difference between living edges and dying ones.

  • To lose sight of the beauty of ideas and of hope and opportunity, and to frustrate the right to be needed, is to be at the dying edge.
  • To be a part of a throwaway mentality that discards goods and ideas, that discards principles and law, that discards persons and families, is to be at the dying edge.
  • To be at the leading edge of consumption, affluence, and instant gratification is to be at the dying edge.
  • To ignore the dignity of work and the elegance of simplicity, and the essential responsibility of serving each other, is to be at the dying edge.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes is reported to have said this about simplicity: “I would not give a fig for the simplicity this side of complexity, but I would give my life for the simplicity on the other side of complexity.” To be at the living edge is to search out the “simplicity on the other side of complexity.”

In a day when so much energy seems to be spent on maintenance and manuals, on bureaucracy and meaningless quantification, to be a leader is to enjoy the special privileges of complexity, of ambiguity, of diversity. But to be a leader means, especially, having the opportunity to make a meaningful difference in the lives of those who permit leaders to lead.

From Leadership Is an Art, A Currency Book published by Doubleday, a division of Random House. ISBN 13: 978-0385512466

Comments Off on Max De Pree: What Is Leadership?Tags:

The Emperor's New Clothes

April 16th, 2009 · Honesty & Candor, Influencers

. . . there lived a vain Emperor whose only worry in life was to dress in elegant clothes. He changed clothes almost every hour and loved to show them off to his people.

Word of the Emperor’s refined habits spread over his kingdom and beyond. Two scoundrels who had heard of the Emperor’s vanity decided to take advantage of it. They introduced themselves at the gates of the palace with a scheme in mind.

“We are two very good tailors and after many years of research we have invented an extraordinary method to weave a cloth so light and fine that it looks invisible. As a matter of fact it is invisible to anyone who is too stupid and incompetent to appreciate its quality.”

The chief of the guards heard the scoundrel’s strange story and sent for the court chamberlain. The chamberlain notified the prime minister, who ran to the Emperor and disclosed the incredible news. The Emperor’s curiosity got the better of him and he decided to see the two scoundrels.

“Besides being invisible, your Highness, this cloth will be woven in colors and patterns created especially for you.” The emperor gave the two men a bag of gold coins in exchange for their promise to begin working on the fabric immediately.

“Just tell us what you need to get started and we’ll give it to you.” The two scoundrels asked for a loom, silk, gold thread and then pretended to begin working. The Emperor thought he had spent his money quite well: in addition to getting a new extraordinary suit, he would discover which of his subjects were ignorant and incompetent. A few days later, he called the old and wise prime minister, who was considered by everyone as a man with common sense.

“Go and see how the work is proceeding,” the Emperor told him, “and come back to let me know.”

The prime minister was welcomed by the two scoundrels.

“We’re almost finished, but we need a lot more gold thread. Here, Excellency! Admire the colors, feel the softness!” The old man bent over the loom and tried to see the fabric that was not there. He felt cold sweat on his forehead.

“I can’t see anything,” he thought. “If I see nothing, that means I’m stupid! Or, worse, incompetent!” If the prime minister admitted that he didn’t see anything, he would be discharged from his office.

“What a marvelous fabric, he said then. “I’ll certainly tell the Emperor.” The two scoundrels rubbed their hands gleefully. They had almost made it. More thread was requested to finish the work.

Finally, the Emperor received the announcement that the two tailors had come to take all the measurements needed to sew his new suit.

“Come in,” the Emperor ordered. Even as they bowed, the two scoundrels pretended to be holding large roll of fabric.

“Here it is your Highness, the result of our labor,” the scoundrels said. “We have worked night and day but, at last, the most beautiful fabric in the world is ready for you. Look at the colors and feel how fine it is.” Of course the Emperor did not see any colors and could not feel any cloth between his fingers. He panicked and felt like fainting. But luckily the throne was right behind him and he sat down. But when he realized that no one could know that he did not see the fabric, he felt better. Nobody could find out he was stupid and incompetent. And the Emperor didn’t know that everybody else around him thought and did the very same thing.

The farce continued as the two scoundrels had foreseen it. Once they had taken the measurements, the two began cutting the air with scissors while sewing with their needles an invisible cloth.

“Your Highness, you’ll have to take off your clothes to try on your new ones.” The two scoundrels draped the new clothes on him and then held up a mirror. The Emperor was embarrassed but since none of his bystanders were, he felt relieved.

“Yes, this is a beautiful suit and it looks very good on me,” the Emperor said trying to look comfortable. “You’ve done a fine job.”

“Your Majesty,” the prime minister said, “we have a request for you. The people have found out about this extraordinary fabric and they are anxious to see you in your new suit.” The Emperor was doubtful showing himself naked to the people, but then he abandoned his fears. After all, no one would know about it except the ignorant and the incompetent.

“All right,” he said. “I will grant the people this privilege.” He summoned his carriage and the ceremonial parade was formed. A group of dignitaries walked at the very front of the procession and anxiously scrutinized the faces of the people in the street. All the people had gathered in the main square, pushing and shoving to get a better look. An applause welcomed the regal procession. Everyone wanted to know how stupid or incompetent his or her neighbor was but, as the Emperor passed, a strange murmur rose from the crowd.

Everyone said, loud enough for the others to hear: “Look at the Emperor’s new clothes. They’re beautiful!”

“What a marvelous train!”

“And the colors! The colors of that beautiful fabric! I have never seen anything like it in my life!” They all tried to conceal their disappointment at not being able to see the clothes, and since nobody was willing to admit his own stupidity and incompetence, they all behaved as the two scoundrels had predicted.

A child, however, who had no important job and could only see things as his eyes showed them to him, went up to the carriage.

“The Emperor is naked,” he said.

“Fool!” his father reprimanded, running after him. “Don’t talk nonsense!” He grabbed his child and took him away. But the boy’s remark, which had been heard by the bystanders, was repeated over and over again until everyone cried: “The boy is right! The Emperor is naked! It’s true!”

The Emperor realized that the people were right but could not admit to that. He though it better to continue the procession under the illusion that anyone who couldn’t see his clothes was either stupid or incompetent. And he stood stiffly on his carriage, while behind him a page held his imaginary mantle.

– Hans Christian Anderson

Comments Off on The Emperor's New ClothesTags:

Words for Our Time

January 28th, 2009 · Character, Values

The Roots of Violence:
Wealth without work,
Pleasure without conscience,
Knowledge without character,
Commerce without morality,
Science without humanity,
Worship without sacrifice,
Politics without principles.
– Gandhi

Comments Off on Words for Our TimeTags:

Scattershooting at Politics & the Economy

November 23rd, 2008 · Politics, Scattershooting

Obama-hope
Scattershooting while wondering whatever happened to
Christopher Cross . . . Magazines and posters equate Obama with hope. It never ceases to amaze me at how people and pundits
left and right continue to put their hopes in politicians. I pray that Barack Obama is a good – even great – President, but as the embodiment of hope he is certain to fall short, Oprah’s fawning description of him as “The One” notwithstanding. At the risk of sounding kneejerkingly predictable, hope is found in God alone. Not in politicians, pundits, or preachers. . . . It is also of interest to me Newsweek Obama Lincoln 72that Obama is being portrayed as the next Lincoln or Roosevelt (FDR, not TR). More and more historians now believe that the New Deal of FDR was a failure at rescuing America from The Great Depression. The economy turned around courtesy of World War II. Lincoln without the Civil War is probably a forgotten President, for it is doubtful that he would have issued the Emancipation Proclamation were the war not going badly. Lincoln does leave us much to remember and even more to ponder. Today I hope President Obama can complete what Lincoln helped start, the freeing of African-Americans from slavery. Not from chattel slavery, but from mental Obama as FDR Timeslavery to victimhood embraced by far too many and harbored as reason to be insular and irresponsible. It is tragic that the growth of the Black middle class has not been pervasive enough to fulfill the aspirations set forth in the Constitution. There have been many barriers to this advancement – certainly not all self-inflicted, and I pray that more barriers are removed with the triumph of Barack Obama. . . .

Meanwhile, is it just me or do you notice how the reasons given by the business geniuses on CNBC and FoxBusiness for the ups and downs of the market seem to change day to day, if not hour to hour? Seems to me that were we living under Jewish Old Testament Law most of these false prophets would have been stoned to death long ago. Or maybe they’re just stoned. . . .

The choice of Rahm Emanuel as White House Chief of Staff continues to puzzle. Guess the new President was looking for someone to play bad cop to his good cop. . . . As many pundits have noted, we seem to be living out Ronald Reagan’s assessment of how Washington thinks and acts: “If it moves, tax it. If it keeps on moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.” . . . If, as the anti-Detroit crowd crows, “Americans would start buying American cars again if Detroit built what they wanted to drive,” then why are more than 50percent of cars sold in America made by GM, Chrysler, or Ford? And why at Toyota’s and Mercedes’s clogging the port of Long Beach, California? I don’t think it’s because Americans don’t want to buy Japanese or German. . . . I wonder what has made Bill Maher such an angry, sullen, sarcastic hater of God and religion. He wasn’t always that way. Reminds me of George Roy Hill, the film director, who did the charming Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Sting, and other smile-getters only to turn out dark and somber films like The World According to Garp and Little Drummer Girl.

. . . Time magazine’s Man of the Year? Shoe-in: Barack Obama. This time the award is well-earned and not a celebration of the bad guys. I’m still not sure it was wise to make Adolf Hitler “Man of the Year,” but Time famously did so. . . . Speaking of villains, how about Hank Paulson? I can’t get past the fact that as the head of Goldman Sachs he qualified himself as being a bigger part of the problem rather than the man with a good solution. Then there’s George W. Bush (43), who apparently skipped economics classes at Yale and Harvard. So we can now add the economic mess – greatest since the Great Depression and still not as bad as it will become – to his list of bad decisions. When he chose to invade Iraq I knew it was a horrendously bad decision: bad for Americans, bad for America’s standing in the world. Once in, we had  to win, but despite the surge that looks like an impossible dream. Rival factions within Iraq are unraveling things more and more every day, and greed and graft has siphoned billions into the hands of a relative few. This may have been the most ill-advised war in American history, making Vietnam look like a smart move (which it wasn’t) in contrast. . . .

Meanwhile, inspiring quotes from the 1920s: “I cannot help but raise a dissenting voice to statements that we are living in a fool’s paradise, and that prosperity in this country must necessarily diminish and recede in the near future.” – E. H. H. Simmons, President, New York Stock Exchange, January 12, 1928. Or how about Irving Fisher, a leading economist who told the New York Times on September 5, 1929, “There may be a recession in stock prices, but not anything in the nature of a crash.”  Of course, the market did crash in late October, 1929. . . . My thinking says that very dark economic times are ahead, and that even a new administration with a new philosophy won’t help. For all the credit given FDR, unemployment remained at record highs throughout the 1930s and the stock market remaining in the tank until the 1950s. “The Greatest Generation” handled it, but will we? . . . And then there was the female elephant who loved to shop but was scared to death of trunk shows.

Comments Off on Scattershooting at Politics & the EconomyTags:

Voted Straight Bull Moose Ticket

November 5th, 2008 · Politics

Bull Moose Convention 1912
The Bull Moose (Progressive) Party platform in 1912 read, in part, that the goal of the party was “To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.” – attributed to Theodore Roosevelt

Seems to me they were on to something.

The good news of the 2008 presidential election is that America’s racial distrust showed real progress in the election of Barak Obama. The bad news is that neither candidate was/is in a good position to deliver on campaign promises, and that the new administration will be populated – as they always are now – by lawyers and pols.

Barak Obama’s leadership skills we be tested as never before in his life, and the presidency itself is undergoing a test not taken in the last 75 years. Let’s pray both tests come out better than Washington gives any of us reason to suspect.

Comments Off on Voted Straight Bull Moose TicketTags:

The Panic of 2008

October 10th, 2008 · Character, News, Politics, Values

Wall Street October 1929 Alt
Panic
. Shouting fire in a crowded theater. Being caught doing something you know is horribly wrong that you thought no one would ever catch you doing.

Greed. When enough is never enough. Wanting more and more, convincing yourself that you deserve more.

Arrogance. Twenty-somethings full of themselves on Wall Street, roaring through their naivety in a red Ferrari.

Bulletproof. Other people are fools, you’re smarter. Others may fall, not you. You’ve got enough money to weather any storm, only the morons get hurt.

Reality. The Panic of 2008 will now enter the history books. Greed, arrogance, and the sense of being bulletproof are revealed to be full of folly. Finger pointing abounds. The smartest guys in the room were wrong again.

Jesus warned us about the folly of financial security, and what He said 2000 years ago stands the test of time and our pseudo-sophisticated culture:

“Take care! Protect yourself against the least bit of greed. Life is not defined by what you have, even when you have a lot.”

Then he told them this story: “The farm of a certain rich man produced a
terrific crop. He talked to himself: ‘What can I do? My barn isn’t big
enough for this harvest.’ Then he said, ‘Here’s what I’ll do: I’ll tear
down my barns and build bigger ones. Then I’ll gather in all my grain
and goods, and I’ll say to myself, Self, you’ve done well! You’ve got
it made and can now retire. Take it easy and have the time of your
life!’

“Just then God showed up and said, ‘Fool! Tonight you die. And your barnful of goods—who gets it?’

“That’s what happens when you fill your barn with Self and not with God” (Luke 12:14-21, The Message)

As the prophets of old used to say, “He who has ears, let him hear.”

Comments Off on The Panic of 2008Tags:

It's Time for Temerity

October 9th, 2008 · Honesty & Candor, Influencers, Politics

Dr. Ian Hay, international missions statesman, wrote an article some years ago about “The Old Temerity.” It was the first time I consciously encountered the word temerity. Abridged dictionaries capture only a piece of its rich meaning. They focus not on the boldness which is at the heart of temerity, they instead press on the foolhardy side of the term. They miss its richness.

Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary (1913) defines temerity thusly :

Te*mer”i*ty (?), n.[L. temeritas, from temere, by chance, rashly; perhaps akin to Skr. tamas darkness: cf. F. témérité.]

Unreasonable contempt of danger; extreme venturesomeness; rashness; as, the temerity of a commander in war. Syn. — Rashness; precipitancy; heedlessness; venturesomeness.

— Temerity, Rashness. These words are closely allied in sense, but have a slight difference in their use and application. Temerity is Latin, and rashness
is Anglo-Saxon. As in many such cases, the Latin term is more select
and dignified; the Anglo-Saxon more familiar and energetic. We show temerity in hasty decisions, and the conduct to which they lead. We show rashness in particular actions, as dictated by sudden impulse. It is an exhibition of temerity to approach the verge of a precipice; it is an act of rashness to jump into a river without being able to swim. Temerity, then, is an unreasonable contempt of danger; rashness is a rushing into danger from thoughtlessness or excited feeling.

I prefer to think of temerity as Dr. Hay did: a boldness that defies convention, trends, prevailing wisdom and/or accepted norms. He used it to describe pioneering missionaries who despite the dangers of unchecked and incurable malaria, hardships of every kind, and uncertain reception by tribes that had never seen an Anglo-Saxon face, pressed into what is now Nigeria. They went because they believed that the Gospel was intended for “every creature” and not just the privileged few in Europe or America. They cared about people they had never met and about whom they knew relatively little. They had temerity. Today there are millions of Christians in Nigeria who are living not as Westerners, but as people of faith whose lives, communities, and cultures have taken on a new hope.

The world financial crisis — seemingly worlds away from 19th century missionary pioneers and their temerity — is due, in no small part, to irresponsible, greedy temerity winning the day. And good people who knew better, who had misgivings, who could have and should have stood up against the craziness and vacuity of derivatives, did nothing. They languished in the shadow of Alan Greenspan, the demigod who ruled America’s economy. Washington, populated by lawyers, lobbyists, and lunatics who are adept at spending, not managing, money was totally incapable of a reasonable response. Now we throw $700,000,000,000 at the problem and it seems to keep getting worse.

Rubin & Greenspan
Even the New York Times now says, “Today, with the world caught in an economic tempest that Mr. Greenspan recently described as ‘the type of wrenching financial crisis that comes along only once in a century,’ his faith in derivatives remains unshaken. . . . ‘Clearly, derivatives are a centerpiece of the crisis, and he was the leading proponent of the deregulation of derivatives,’ said Frank Partnoy, a law professor at the University of San Diego and an expert on financial regulation. . . .  If Mr. Greenspan had acted differently during his tenure as Federal Reserve chairman from 1987 to 2006, many economists say, the current crisis might have been averted or muted. Over the years, Mr. Greenspan helped enable an ambitious American experiment in letting market forces run free. Now, the nation is confronting the consequences” (New York Times, October 8, 2008).

So what about the rest of us? What can we learn from global events that are out of our control? We can learn that without the timely use of temerity we all are subject to consequences that range from unfortunate to dire. For example, when we see black and white, obsessive-compulsive behaviors take over a group, a company, a culture we must stand up and say that there are indeed shades of gray. And that chief among the gray shades are people. People count. People are not statistics, charted trends, or problems. Everyone matters. That’s why the bold men and women who braved all the dangers of West Africa in the 19th century did what the black and white leaders of the day said they could not. “You will not see the Sudan. Your children will not see the Sudan. Your children’s children may,” said an Anglican bishop from his comfortable lodgings in London. He was wrong. Temerity was right.

It’s time for some temerity. And timely temerity begins with you and me. Not in Washington or London. You will seldom find it there.

Comments Off on It's Time for TemerityTags:

Greed & Trying Times

October 7th, 2008 · Money, Values

These are trying times. Add to the long list of uncertainties the economy. It seems $700 billion won’t buy what it used to buy, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average has now dropped 1,400 points in the last week. The DJIA is now below 10,000 for the first time since October 2004. Recession is out of the closet and in everyone’s vocabulary.

Here’s how it the DJIA chart looks on a five-year scale:

Picture 1While there are many factors in play, it’s clear that the driving force in the global economic debacle is greed. Greed is a constant in the midst of changing times.

It’s easy to rail against the Wall Street bosses and their crafty minions who got us into the present mess, but Martin Luther brings it close to home for me:

“There are some who think that they have God and everything they need when they have money and property; they trust in them and boast in them so stubbornly and securely that they care for no one else. They too, have a god – mammon by name, that is, money and property – on which they set their whole heart. This is the most common idol on earth. Those who have money and property feel secure, happy, and fearless, as if they were sitting in the midst of paradise. On the other hand, those who have nothing doubt and despair as if they knew of no god at all. We will find very few who are cheerful, who do not fret and complain, if they do not have mammon. This desire for wealth clings and sticks to our nature all the way to the grave.”

So how will I handle things? It’s a big test of faith.

Comments Off on Greed & Trying TimesTags:

Has Anything Changed?

August 9th, 2008 · Spiritual Journey, Uncategorized, Values

Forty years ago Tommie Smith and John Carlos, teammates on the U.S. Olympic team, won gold and bronze medals in the 200 meter dash at the Games in Mexico City. Here is how Time magazine described the scene at the time:

“‘Faster, Higher, Stronger’ is the motto of the Olympic Games. ‘Angrier, nastier, uglier’ better describes the scene in Mexico City last week. There, in the same stadium from which 6,200 pigeons swooped skyward to signify the opening of the ‘Peace Olympics,’ Sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos, two disaffected black athletes from the U.S. put on a public display of petulance that sparked one of the most unpleasant controversies in Olympic history and turned the high drama of the games into theater of the absurd.

“Smith had just won the 200-meter dash in a record-breaking 19.8 sec. Carlos, his bearded teammate from San Jose State College, had finished third. Together, they turned up for the awards ceremony shoeless, wearing knee-length black stockings and a black glove on one hand (the right for Tommie, the left for John). Along with Australia’s Peter Norman, the second-place finisher, they mounted the victory pedestal to receive their medals. Then, as the U.S. flag was raised and the band struck up The Star-Spangled Banner, the two black athletes bowed their heads and raised their gloved hands in a clenched-fist salute. A wave of boos rippled through the spectators as the pair left the field. Smith and Carlos responded by making interesting gestures at the stands.

“At a press conference later, the two men explained that the black stockings represented poverty; the black fists meant black power and black unity. Said Smith: ‘We are black and proud to be black. White America will say “an American won,” not “a black American won.” If it had been something bad, they would have said “a Negro.”‘ Added Carlos, somewhat disjointedly: ‘White people seem to think we’re animals. I want people to know we’re not animals, not inferior animals, like cats and rats. They think we’re some sort of show horse. They think we can perform and they will throw us some peanuts and say “Good boy, good boy.”‘

“Effective but Petty. As a way of calling attention to racial strife in the U.S., the demonstration was undeniably effective. But it was also painfully petty. East Germans, Russians, even Cubans, all stand at attention when The Star-Spangled Banner or any other national anthem is played. Other equally militant U.S. black athletes were aghast at Smith and Carlos’ actions. ‘I came here to win a gold medal—not to talk about black power,’ said Ohio’s Willie Davenport next day after winning the 110-meter high hurdles. He stood straight and tall and proud on the Olympic pedestal.”

As a white male with black friends, I had just graduated from USC and was preparing to begin seminary the fall after those summer games. I remember being very angry at the gesture. Looking back, they were probably right and I was probably wrong. Their point certainly stands up.

These 40 years hence, however, I find myself chagrined at the attitude of probably 80%+ of the African-American players in the NBA. They now make millions and have access and privilege that goes beyond anything the “average American” can enjoy. Most live in the lap of luxury. Fully 19 of the 20 highest paid players in the NBA are black. They earn from a low of $14,520,000 per year (Michael Redd) to a high of $22,000,000 per year (Kevin Garnett). Yet they still do not find it possible to lift their heads during the playing of the Star-Spangled Banner as though they might have some respect for the country which pays them these outrageous sums to play basketball. Instead, they look at the floor with expressions on their faces more appropriate for a graveside.

Maybe I still don’t get it. Or, maybe they don’t realize how good they have it, thanks to men like Carlos and Smith.

Comments Off on Has Anything Changed?Tags: