Jolt Quote XV

"You came to see a race today. To see someone win. It happened to be me. But I want you to do more than just watch a race. I want you to take part in it. I want to compare faith to running in a race. It's hard. It requires concentration of will, energy of soul. You experience elation when the winner breaks the tape - especially if you've got a bet on it. But how long does that last? You go home. Maybe you're dinner's burnt. Maybe you haven't got a job. So who am I to say, "Believe, have faith," in the face of life's realities? I would like to give you something more permanent, but I can only point the way. I have no formula for winning the race. Everyone runs in her own way, or his own way. And where does the power come from, to see the race to its end? From within. Jesus said, "Behold, the Kingdom of God is within you. If with all your hearts, you truly seek me, you shall ever surely find me." If you commit yourself to the love of Christ, then that is how you run a straight race." (Eric Liddell from the movie Chariots of Fire)

I like the notion of faith compared to running a race. Run with an aim to win.

Striking for a Principle? (how long....)

Since late July, public services in Vancouver has been halted. The strike is entering its 85th day. Libraries are closed, senior daycare and childcare centers remain shut, garbage collection are stopped and many parks, building maintenance etc are not available. In other words, when the union and the city management are at loggerheads, the people suffer. Interestingly, both the union and the management are part of the people too, so they too will be affected in some way. As a parent, I find this article from the Vancouver Sun, illuminating and make a lot of sense. it is one thing to fight for a principle. It is yet another to fight all the way while the public is affected negatively as a result. The strike has gone on for too long. It is time to look longer term and ask ourselves what kind of principles we want our kids to learn.

Common sense, maturity missing among some of the union leadership
Vancouver Sun

Thursday, October 11, 2007

You can't always get what you want but if you try sometimes you just might find you get what you need. -- Jagger/Richards

Children learn early on that they can't have everything they ask for. By the time they reach kindergarten, the concepts of limits, trade-offs and compromise are well entrenched.

These principles are reinforced in adulthood when common sense comes with maturity. They are fundamental to social order, to family relationships and to employment contract negotiations.

Vancouver's inside city workers, members of CUPE Local 15, recognized that labour negotiations require give and take and voted 73 per cent in favour of accepting the terms of a contract proposed by mediator Brian Foley, which include a 17.5-per-cent wage hike over five years, a $1,000 signing bonus and amendments to provisions covering contracting out, harassment, whistleblowing and job reclassification.

CUPE Local 15 president Paul Faoro, who recommended his members approve the proposed deal, clearly understood those fundamental principles. He said the collective agreement "had been bettered," and that his members can go to work knowing it is the best deal they can get "under the circumstances."

No, the union didn't achieve everything it might have hoped for but it has improved the terms of employment for its members. That's its job. The settlement matches those of public servants in similar occupations in neighbouring municipalities. It's one they can live with until the next round of negotiations.

But the leadership of CUPE Local 1004, representing outside workers, and CUPE Local 391, representing library workers, told their members to reject Foley's recommendations. Library workers did so overwhelmingly -- 78.1 per cent voted against it -- even though nearly half would benefit from a job classification upgrade on top of the regular wage increase. "They'd would have had a wishy-washy committee that went nowhere," Foley said of the union's demands. "I gave them pay equity."

Most outside workers defied their union leaders, who had urged rejection of the proposals, and voted 58 per cent in favour. It's a rare event when the rank and file fails to heed the advice of its local executive. Nevertheless, the members' clearly stated intention to accept the deal, end the strike and return to work will be denied because of a union bylaw that requires a two-thirds majority to ratify a contract.

Foley said he had "poured his heart and soul" into finding a solution to the strike. But Dave Van Dyke, a Local 1004 bargaining committee representative, disparaged his efforts. "Foley's sold us down the river," he said.

Since a majority of outside workers don't share that opinion, Local 1004 leaders might want to tone down the rhetoric if they plan on being re-elected. Besides, CUPE locals agreed to have Foley mediate their contract dispute with the city. To suggest he was partisan and did not act in good faith is untrue and an insult that warrants an apology.

Like children who want it all now, some union leaders are demanding benefits and restrictive contract language (particularly as it relates to disciplinary measures and caps on deferred vacation) beyond what Foley has proposed. They are also beyond what the city is prepared to pay. Even so-called non-monetary issues carry a cost, whether they're sick leave, vacation entitlements, extended health insurance or contracting out. Such measures make it more expensive to run the city.

City finances are not infinite. Municipal funding comes from taxpayers -- indirectly from the province and directly through property taxes and fees. Vancouver residents already face a property tax hike of eight per cent and aren't likely to welcome further increases to pay for richer wages and benefits for city workers than they receive for their own labours.

Foley's proposals meet the test of a good compromise -- they don't make everyone happy, but set reasonable terms that provide all at least some of what they need.
© The Vancouver Sun 2007

Aiming High in Christ

There is no leaf that is not in Your care. There is no cry that was not heard by You before it was uttered. There is no water in the shales that was not hidden there by Your wisdom. There is no concealed spring that was not concealed by You. There is no glen for a lone house that was not planned by You for a lone house. There is no man for that acre of woods that was not made by You for that acre of woods.
But there is a great comfort in the substance of silence than in the answer to a question. Eternity is in the present. Eternity is in the palm of the hand. Eternity is a seed of fire whose sudden roots break barriers that keep my heart from being an abyss.
(Thomas Merton, Entering the Silence (Harper San Francisco), p487)

I am constantly fascinated by Thomas Merton, whose understanding of happiness is in relation to God. In fact, he claims that "The only unhappiness is not to love God." That makes his spiritual walk most authentic, very Christian. Today I was reflecting upon the meaning of life and the spiritual journeys that a Christian take. I chanced upon this segment (above quote) from Merton about solitude and silence. Reading it makes me realize that solitude is not a matter of being alone by oneself. It is an enjoyment solely with God, a meeting with God that we do not want to end. It is like a first date with someone we like, in which we never want it to end. A moment of divine presence with Christ which we want to remain forever. Silence is seen as a form of dialogue with God. The constantly asking, persistently seeking and regularly finding is a measure of our spiritual health. Forget about those types of spiritual disciplines, which aim more at self-gratification, or mere obligatory fulfillment of a set of do's and don'ts. It may be ok to start off our spiritual search via obligation, but we cannot always remain there.

Consider a self-professed Christian who has never evidenced their desire to grow. Spirituality to them may simply mean going to church faithfully every Sunday, or just saying their graces before meals. If Christ is in all, and through all, should not our pursuit of Christ be 7 days a week, 24 hours a day? My personal view is that whatever we want to aim in life, let's aim high. If we want to live a good and perfect life, aim high towards Christ, the author and finisher of our faith.

Regent College Grand Celebration

"The wind tower art glass installation complements the dynamic lines of the tower, and acts as a visible expression of Regent College’s spiritual mission. The south-facing façade will collect solar energy during the day, and use this energy for illumination at night, acting as a welcoming beacon for the UBC community.

At the heart of the design is a majestic column of light, flowing like a waterfall in silvery blues, violet and white. Arranged within this column is dichroic glass which presents an ever-changing rainbow of colour to the viewer. Woven within and through the flowing waterfall of light is the Lord’s Prayer, written in Aramaic."(Sarah Hall)

On Sep 29th-30th 2007, Regent College's "Writing a New Chapter" campaign officially comes to a close. It is termed a celebration weekend to reflect the entire college's gratitude to God for providing the financial donations through donors and well-wishers. Who says Canada is spiritually impoverished? There are many individuals, even organizations who believe in the Regent vision and mission.

On Saturday, there were several faculty members who gave a 30-minute lecture on their vocation, their passion and their mission in life through Regent College. The strong faculty representation includes Eugene Peterson, John Stackhouse, Darrell Johnson, Rikk Watts, Paul Williams, Ross Hastings and several others. Sarah Hall was also there to explain her design of the wind tower.

On Sunday, I participated in the morning service at Regent. Every entity was represented, with me representing the part of students. It is a deep honour for me to step up to lead everyone in the reading of the Apostle's Creed. My focus was on uniting everybody. This is my lead up prior to the initial reading.

The world tells us that we are all different. Many people, including Christians say to each other, You have your opinion, and I have mine, so let us all agree to disagree. The truth is, we all have more in common than there are differences. Let us stand to read the Apostles' Creed.

Several individuals came up to me to express appreciation for what I have done. I was touched as I see them blessed by God. That moment, I realize in my heart the meaning of Ps 133.

How good and pleasant it is when brothers live together in unity! (Ps 133:1)

I came across several links that talks about the event.
- Official Next Chapter site
- Wind Tower
- Mark Petersen (A Canadian philanthropist)
- Another Wind-Tower article
- Sarah Hall Studio

The JiPod

Hi, many of you have heard of the venerable Dr J I Packer. Many people all over the world knows Regent College largely due to this gentleman. In keeping up to date with technology, Regent College bookstore has 'technologize' our great professor of theology. This is called the 'JiPod'. Check out the website here. Some great lectures are available from this location, free!

Is "Give and Take" a valid Christian Expression?

"Let's give and take." "Our organization is a place where everyone is expected to 'give-and-take' ." These are common cliches we hear from time to time, from day to day.

Even in Christian organizations, such 'give-and-take' are unconsciously inked in the unwritten code of conduct for all employees and volunteers. The concept is simple. Sometimes I give so that you can take. Other times, the converse becomes true.

The problem I have with such give-and-take behaviour lies in the expectation that comes with it.

• Will I be prepared to give if there is no possibility of taking back what I have given?
  
• Will I take something if I am expected to give back another in kind?
  
• Is it true giving when we only give to people who can afford to reciprocate our giving?

I think while the earthly practice of give-and-take remains theologically flawed, I still think that there are situations where it can still be useful. However, it should not be the first card we flash everytime, especially for Christians. If I were to put it in a chronological order, the flow goes as follows:

#1 - Take-and-Take
#2 - Give-And-Give
#3 - (if need to), Give-and Take

Here is my rationale. Firstly, we are from the start incapable of giving. We are all born as babies, desiring to be carried, wanting to be fed and clamoring frequently for attention. How can babies be asked to give? They cannot communicate or provide comfort in ways adults often expect of each other. Parents not only have to give time and attention, sometimes they need to go beyond the call of duty to make sure that ALL the needs of the baby are taken care of. Young Christians are in that kind of situation, which is one reason why Paul requests that young believers are not to be called into positions of leadership in the Church. The only person who can give us everything is God. Between God and us, we are always on the receiving end of grace. Can we give God what he already has? Second, true giving can only come with true receiving. This leads us to the next stage, a give-and-give attitude. Christ give and give. We take and take. Even today, Christ is continuing to give us wisdom and truth, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. We need to 'take-and-take' (from the Lord), so that we can 'give-and-give' to others. The less we 'take-and-take' from God, the less able we are to 'give-and-give' to one another. It is from this perspective that I think 'give-and-take' is less than the Christian ideal.

Perhaps the final stage of 'give-and-take' does apply in organizations where people have expectations of each other. I will argue that a 'give-and-take' relationship is not good in the long run. It is as unstable as a grenade, constantly needing to have 'something in return' to act as a safety catch to avoid detonation. I will further argue, that if we allow #3 (give-and-take) to dominate our thinking, our lifestyle and our expectations of one another, we will be digging our own trench of unhappiness hemming our own selves in. The gulf of the trench becomes so wide that those without the ability to 'give' to our expectations cannot cross over to meet us. Relationships will become more transactional. This transactional implication is my third argument. The problem is that human relationships get defined by one's ability to meet one another's expectations, written or unwritten. Transactions are very impersonal, as impersonal as an online book purchase from Amazon.

'Give-and-Take' is essentially a transaction of expectations. It is not to be held up as the Christian way of doing things. It works in many areas of society. It get things done. That is besides the point. It is the attitude of the heart that will put a relationship on a more durable and longer life span. Without this attitude, life gets reduced to a series of transactions and calculative behaviour. When that happens, life loses the human touch. Thankfully, Christ has shown us the way. Only Christ can restore our human touch. Let's begin with Christ in our heart and receive grace from him. The more we take-and-take from Christ, the more able we are to give-and-give to one another. Of course, When I say take-and-take, God is completely free to choose to reveal himself to us in both supernatural phenomena and through brothers and sisters like you and me. The prayer of St Anselm is a helpful prayer:

God of truth,
I ask that I may receive, so that my joy may be full.
Meanwhile, let my mind meditate on it, let my tongue speak of it,
let my heart love it, let my mouth preach it,
my flesh thirst for it, and my whole being desire it,
until I enter into the joy of my Lord,
who is God one and triune, blessed forever. Amen.

(St Anselm, Prayers and Meditations of St Anselm with the Proslogion, trans . Benedicta Ward, (London: Penguin Books, 1973), p81)

"Singapore" by Mary Oliver

Singapore

In Singapore, in the airport,
A darkness was ripped from my eyes.
In the women’s restroom, one compartment stood open.
A woman knelt there, washing something
in the white bowl.

Disgust argued in my stomach
and I felt, in my pocket, for my ticket.

A poem should always have birds in it.
Kingfishers, say, with their bold eyes and gaudy wings.
Rivers are pleasant, and of course trees.
A waterfall, or if that’s not possible, a fountain
rising and falling.
A person wants to stand in a happy place, in a poem.

When the woman turned I could not answer her face.
Her beauty and her embarrassment struggled together, and
neither could win.
She smiled and I smiled. What kind of nonsense is this?
Everybody needs a job.

Yes, a person wants to stand in a happy place, in a poem.
But first we must watch her as she stares down at her labor,
which is dull enough.
She is washing the tops of the airport ashtrays, as big as
hubcaps, with a blue rag.
Her small hands turn the metal, scrubbing and rinsing.
She does not work slowly, nor quickly, like a river.
Her dark hair is like the wing of a bird.

I don’t doubt for a moment that she loves her life.
And I want to rise up from the crust and the slop
and fly down to the river.
This probably won’t happen.
But maybe it will.
If the world were only pain and logic, who would want it?

Of course, it isn’t.
Neither do I mean anything miraculous, but only
the light that can shine out of a life. I mean
the way she unfolded and refolded the blue cloth,
The way her smile was only for my sake; I mean
the way this poem is filled with trees, and birds.

~ Mary Oliver ~

(House of Light)