Adventures in Security: 0 Days Without an Incident

My streak is over. I have been working security at a nearby ritzy venue for almost a year. Over the course of that time, I have somewhat proudly noted that every real fight or altercation we have encountered I have been absent. I would insinuate my particular demeanor was more comforting and successful to de-escalate situations instead of allowing disagreements to turn to fights. It is worth mentioning the pedigree of the venue is far from the typical dive bar. We are not some ragtag tight polo shirt wearing element. We are in suits minus the tie, if you can peg a man by his dress then we are certainly a professional team. A rough approximation would say there are only events which require our intervention once a month. A typical night is filled with checking IDs, assisting bussers with broken glasses, and clearing the venue at closing time. As with most security, our primary purpose is fulfilled in our mere presence. I should probably note that of the three nights a week which our security team is present, I usually only work one of those.

Although I have an older brother, throughout our childhood we never really fought. Dad ensured no such hijinks would be permitted and it worked. We were never taught to back down from any hostile acts but nor were we taught to go looking for trouble. Because my investigation in Complementarian theology followed my service in the Army, I am not inclined to think the “protective desire” was something from my theological convictions. I do not know. We can chalk it up as a social construct which much of my generation has embraced.

Anyways, Saturday night was a learning experience. Not only did I get to assist with an escort following an altercation, as that one was settling I was the lead guard who broke up another fight. Adrenaline flowing in all, the true question of fight or flight was answered in the heat of the moment. It should be noted, that we do not fight patrons… well, I do not fight patrons. When two people are not playing nice with each other, the best resolution is to separate them. It is not worth the time or effort to figure out who was in the right or wrong until the altercation is ceased. We ascertain the details and responsibilities of the event following a successful ceasing of the fight itself. My job is to get between two people fighting and separate them. Not only was that night a first, which I finally got to be the first person on scene, it was the first time I was really punched in the face. I am quite certain had it not been for a broken nose my junior year of highschool, I would certainly have bled after that strike, thanks for that Dave :D.

Once the sting of the facial numbness streaked across my face and the fight was stopped I almost instantly thought about a quote from Muhammad Ali a friend has often quoted to me. “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.” Of course, my friend has always used that phrase more for its metaphorical purpose, but this weekend it was rather literal. Until one is presented with an actual situation where tempers are flaring, danger and fear were present, we can only hope to do the right thing given sufficient mental preparation and/or physical training. Due to my lack of direct experience, I have not had much opportunity to hone my hand-to-hand combat skills. I can generally use my size and strength enough to mitigate my lack of technique, but even then, until this weekend all such mental simulations remained only in theory.

Now I know. I can take a real hit to the face. Aside from the crash against my skull, and slight numbness, I did not falter. I continued pulling the patrons off of one another and once the two were separated the altercation was finished. In the aftermath I was reminded of the temperament of my colleagues. The would undoubtedly disagree with my findings in Babysitting and Bouncing.

I was also able to take a few minutes to reflect upon the numerous types of security I have been involved. From time as a soldier, to a summer camp security guard, to a bouncer. Each capacity has honed the desire to protect into an ability to do so. I am also reminded of the repeated instruction in Army Combatives training. Our instructors repeatedly stated “We are only teaching you just enough to get your ___ beat.” It was a rather simple block of instruction but they were certain that we did not act too empowered by our basic combative skills test. If I recall right, on one of my sparring opportunities I dived head-first into a guillotine choke hold. Oh the joys of youth and vigor.

I returned from Hume on Friday, after a two-week visit. I truly love Hume and the people up there. This summer is far different from how I imagined it even two months before. It has required a type of waiting that has not been required since my exit from the Army. I had no idea what I would be doing this summer as it began and as the weeks passed hopes were dashed and opportunities unveiled. These revelations remind and reassure me that I am supposed to be exactly where I am. God has been guiding these steps far longer than I have been aware enough to recognize their destination. My adventures for this summer are far from over. Although the desired accomplishments are somewhat lacking, the thankfulness for being about to return to Hume, more than statisfy.

Virtue & Manhood

Throughout this last semester in a Constitutional Law course, we spent a significant amount of time focused on the 1st Amendment. More exactly, once we got past Substantive Due Process, the remaining weeks of class were spent on Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, and Establishment Clause. As we were grinding through the cases it was unavoidable to see progressive change in American values in the 20th century. As the nation pulled away from an exclusively Christian-based set of ethics, sometimes in an effort to oppress fringe religious members and to outright discriminate other religious minorities, we eventually got to the legal space we are now. The three-part test decided in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1970) has been the standard test concerning religious entanglement since its ruling. In the separating of the Church from the State, there has also been a separation of virtue from society. For whatever flaws the secularist might declare about the Christian history of the United States, the clear understanding of American virtue is not likely to be one of them.

Virtue is the popular topic in my school’s political philosophy department. Aristotle’s exposition in Book 5 of the Nicomachean Ethics is a required reading for the topic. The Founders were educated in such ancient theory and steeped in the modern political philosophy that was also shaped by the ancient notion of virtue. Between the ancient thinkers and the sacred texts, virtue was at the very least the second half of the Ten Commandments by the time the nation was founded. In the secularizing of our nation, where has all the virtue gone? Throughout the political and legal writings in the first century of our nation public virtue was often the citation for allowing religion in government. There was an undeniable link between the notion of virtue and the role of religion in the public space. As the decades passed, and for whatever reason one might point to, public religion has fallen out of favor. The prominent place houses of worship once had in the community has been lost. Where or what other institutional structure do people from various demographics regularly gather to learn a particular set of morality? This is one of the better definitions I have heard that describes the loss of civic virtue.

What is worse, what has civic virtue been replaced? If not the State, then nothing. Dennis Prager, a talk radio show host,  frequently points out at this loss of social morality. According to the jurisprudence of the Court, the most sacred right appears to be one’s sexual proclivities. Arguably the next most important rights being declared are self-identity and right of conscience. None of these “rights” were articulated by the Founders, but all of them in the not too distant future may threaten the rights which were articulated by the Founders. Where am I going with this?

The recent issues in the news from bathrooms and gender identity, killing a gorilla to save a child, and now an example of justice not fully served, I think all of these are evidence of our lost virtue. It might be worth noting, the ancient philosophers did not find individual rights to even be a issue worth considering within the dialogue of virtue. The notion of individual rights is exclusively a Western principle which I would argue originates in the Imago Dei described in Genesis. Harvard Law’s Professor Jeannie Suk pointed out a difficult paradox concerning the bathroom issue, particularly concerning Title IX protections in which schools will be caught in no-win situations that may cost them dearly. Likewise the concern of a gorilla over that of a child is a clear example of a morally bankrupt understanding of human life opposed to animal life.

How is the case of the sex crimes committed by Brock Turner an example of lost virtue? Less in the individual act but the occurrences of sex crimes at large and the questionable justice that was the sentence. On a positive note, they have been going down on a national scale but one must also question how many of these crimes are not reported by colleges to proper legal authorities. Unless Mr. Turner appeals the conviction, the punishment leveled against him for his crimes will stand and he cannot be retried for a better punishment due to Double Jeopardy. This case has also challenged the validity of the Court to wage proper justice because the sentence was so satisfying. There has been significant writing across the decades concerning the restraint by which judges rule on certain cases so as to preserve the validity of the Court. As the argument goes, if a wayward judiciary acts as an unelected legislature who has power over the Supreme Law of the Land, it would be the people’s democratic duty to abolish such an institution.

Concerning the event, trial, and aftermath, there have been many heartfelt responses offering God’s grace to Brock Turner and  many articles rebuffing his father’s insensitive comments. Often it seems national news fails to get the most basic understanding of a person’s intrinsic value. It appears with this case was a perfect storm of outrage. Justice appears to have been avoided, and the perpetrator was a white male who was at least perceived to be upper class. It is culturally expected that everyone castigate this individual as much as possible. I find the outrage of this case to be completely founded and if I were a voter in Santa Clara County I would see about recalling Judge Persky. My understanding of grace hopes the victim and the perpetrator might recognize God’s goodness in their lives if not now at some point in the future.

Brock Turner has already experienced mercy. He was convicted of three felony counts of sexual assault. His sentence was 6 months in prison and 3 years probation. He was convicted of violating California Penal Code 220 and two counts of violating 289. A violation of 220 “shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, four, or six years.” For each violation of 289 “shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six, or eight years.” One’s basic math skills then say his punishment should have been 8-22 years in prison according to the Penal Code. I originally intended on providing the actual text of the penal code but even those were more graphic than I wish to appear on my blogs. The letter of the victim to her perpetrator was even more graphic and difficult to read.

This event is not representative of manhood across the nation. The universal public outrage might be a sign that all is not yet lost. Then again, until civil discourse might occur about masculinity in the United States the state of men might not have a reason to be optimistic. I would argue that manhood cannot be well defined without a clear understanding of public virtue.

Women in Combat: Theological Considerations

Gender has become a rather contentious issue in recent years. From the Obergefell v. Hodges decision on marriage, to the transition of celebrity’s gender identity, to the bathroom issues within the private and public realm, it appears to be a defining time in our social history. Within the military community changes have also been made and achieved. Most recently women almost had to register for the draft.  There are several military cultural factors that contribute to the discussion which have not been articulated well. I will attempt to address them as best as I can. In this part, I’ll consider the theological implications.

A brief summary of Complementarianism. It is a theological view that gender roles exist for men and women. This takes place in the home and church. As a single guy, I have never had to work out the exact details of what that will look like for the family I hope to have. I have had amazing demonstrations of what this looks like in practice with a number of families in my church. Of particular influence has been the example of the family I have lived with for the last several years. Their godly example has added numerous practical examples to a theology I embraced from a predominantly scholastic understanding. Men and women are of equal value as image bearers of God, but they are not the same. Based on my observations, outside of churches who make this position a distinctive, complementarianism is a minority view within the Christian community.

Perhaps the most misunderstood aspect of complementarianism is the confusion with chauvinism. Gender roles are not about ability or fitness. Given the whole of the Christian life is not about our abilities or anything we do but depends on who God is and what he has done, this understanding should not be difficult to receive. This probably makes more sense coming from a Reformed theological position concerning salvation.

How does a theologically conservative Christian integrate his somewhat libertarian political beliefs within this political discussion? Yes, I am a “combat veteran” according to the Department of Veteran Affairs. Excluding the infrequent basic combat training, my time in the  Army were all as staff positions. Every level of training and every unit I was assigned was integrated. Throughout the totality of both my deployments I worked alongside of and was subordinate to women.

Being subordinate to women in those roles did not challenge my complementarian view of gender because Complementarianism concerns itself with the order of the home and church. I do not see it necessarily applying outside those institutions. I do not see a conflict between women in secular supervisory positions and a complementarianism. I do not see a clear theologically based teaching that would prohibit women from operating in combat roles.

Even in the designation of men as protector, the context is between a husband and wife. The Genesis account of the Fall makes certain implications that the man should be the protector, but again, that was a husband and wife context. The argument is “Why did God call to Adam even though Eve sinned first?” I think this implied that Adam should have protected his wife, he failed to protect her in that instance. The purpose of the text was not to articulate a firm position on gender roles, at best I have to insert my understandings to find that conclusion. The examples throughout the Old Testament where only men were designated as soldiers were descriptive over prescriptive. I think there are certain practical and strategic reasons why the armies in the ancient world were almost exclusively for men. Those reasons are not based in a theological understanding.

The best biblical instance of men being designated as the protectors come from the analogy of husband and wife to Christ and the Church. Once again, this is limited within the husband and wife relationship. This is where I derive that the man is to be the protector. To be the protector he does not have to have a disposition towards violence. In fact, I have known many women, Christ followers and not, who had better dispositions to physical hostility than men. Half jokingly even as ushers we have coined the emergency exit in the sanctuary adjacent to childcare as the “mama bear door.” Given the instance of an emergency evacuation, there is no question many moms will attain what might be superhuman strength and will to get to their children.

Whether one is predisposed to address physical hostility or not on a theological level is irrelevant. Remember, the basis of the Christian faith is to do things through God’s power and ability, not our own. Therefore the sacrificial husband needs only to sacrifice himself in obedience to God. Whether that means engaging in the fight he may or may not win, or he will pick up the extra shifts of work to provide, all of it is in obedience to Christ from the example he provided. To be the head means to set himself aside for the good of others. When there is a sacrifice to be made, it first comes from the man. Depending on the day, this may look like a burden or a joy, hopefully it will be a joy more than a burden.

Within the secular context, the sacrificial nature of the relationship tends to only exert itself in the dire circumstances. There is certainly a predominant view that men are natural protectors, whether this comes from an evolutionary understanding of society and social constructs or is an example of biblical masculinity, I would argue the popular understanding is a result of all the influences. Anecdotally, I have encountered many agnostic and non-theist men who held a “traditional” view of women and children especially when the issue relates to self defense. Especially in this nation of immigrants there are innumerable stories of poor families with hard working parents who provided opportunity for their kids they could not achieve. This is perhaps the most common and still compelling example of sacrifice in American society.

I do not see a clear biblical teaching which men ought to be generally postured towards violence. I know between my years in the military and working in numerous security capacities, I am not apprehensive to the idea of physical altercation. There is clear teaching that we ought to be Peacemakers. In the months that working as a Bouncer I have yet to get into a fight. Every opportunity so far, I have been able to de-escalate the tensions to prevent the fight that likely would have occurred. In contrast to the methods of my coworkers, the more I approach Security with an apprehension towards violence the more often the altercations are resolved peacefully. Throughout the process of conflict resolution one must be willing to recognize the real possibilities of harm, but one ought not look forward to it. Any violent action should only be done with the most reluctance. This is the same manner I approach my philosophy of self-defense. I have spent thousands of dollars in equipment and supplies. I’ve spent countless hours practicing at ranges and at home. These exercises are fun in their own right, but the purpose for which I train, I hope with the utmost sincerity will never be needed.

It is Summer

If there was any question about my personality type, I am an extrovert. Today was a great day. Although this is the first stage of summer mode, I am working on waking up at a reasonable hour to be productive. I have a few short essays to write this week for a take home final and throughout the summer I have books to read, research to do, papers to revise, and I’m stewing over another paper to write from scratch. In case you didn’t know, unlike public school teachers who get a fair portion of their summer off for leisure, amongst professors, summer is prime research and writing time. As I continue to aspire for such a role, it would be wise to ease into that pattern.

So yes, today was great. I got some work done. My alumnus is in close proximity and they have an unbeatable gym rate, so I have a place to exercise this summer. There is a new All-You-Can-Eat Sushi place that a friend and I tried. It is a winner. The price was reasonable, the selection sufficient, the fish was good, better than my previous AYCE sushi place down here and the distance was not bad. I still favor Korean BBQ as my number one social food, who doesn’t like BBQ after all. There might even be a time-lapse of one of my many KBBQ excursions on my facebook. It is not my video otherwise I would be a proper chap and link it here. I cannot recall the last time I have had such a food coma. I figured all the rice from the nigiri would take its toll. When I got home I lounged on the couch and according to the reports of the family, I was sound asleep for about an hour. In proper summer fashion, I later relocated to my bed for a couple more hours. Hence it is 1am and I writing this.

I love family dinners. I am going on my third year renting from a family which our meeting was unquestionably providential. At least three nights a week I am able to join them in family dinner. Between their company, wise counsel, and constant pursuit for Christ and his blessings, I cannot recall a more spiritually healthy living environment I have had. There are moments when I long that my own childhood was closer to that of the one the kids in the family are receiving, but we each have our own path. I should refer to the last blog that one ought not be envious of others joys but celebrate with them. There are no words that have the potential to properly express my gratefulness to be apart of this family.

After dinner and conversation I made my way to the gym. Whenever my schedule changes, it is always a challenge to establish a new schedule. For this last school year I would use the gym at Claremont McKenna, it is one of the best facilities I have been to in the US. It is also adjacent to the ROTC office and there is a bit of nostalgia to see the cadre around and the recruits shaping up to be the next generation of military leaders. I was blessed enough to finish my workout before I saw some undergrad friends I usually only see on Sunday. Between the military jokes with a marine veteran and the other an aspiring Army chaplain and the real talks we share, I value these friendships. Also, a gym is a great place for men to bond. I think such a venue is inferior only to a shooting range, camping trip, or BBQ. It might be of the same level as a football field.

On one hand I think back and the day was not as productive as I aimed... Then again, I did finish one of my essays tonight, so really the objective was completed. Between today and the recent Sundays which I have been able to join friends at lunch and the movies, I have missed the freedom of a social life. I am still trying to comprehend what this summer in Southern California will look like. Every memory I have of a summer in the last four years has been in the middle of Sequoia National Forest for the majority of the summer. Hume’s constant presence in my life has been a blessing. It has not been easy to recognize the passing of that season. I still hold on to hope that I might return for more than an incidental road trip or visit.

Summer is here. I look forward to the adventures and lessons that will be learned during this break from coursework.

Biblical Gender Roles: Headship vs. Domination

Among my deployment goals, at least for the duration of the deployment, one has been to write more regularly. Clashing with my desire to write something of substance with a decent frequency has been my understanding or at least growth of my understanding of the given topic I wish to share about. Most recently I raided John Piper's online book repository and have had a more fruitful use of my time. I recently finished Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood (BFMW) and promptly continued on with Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood(RBMW).

When I started reading the first book I was expecting it to talk about masculinity and femininity from scripture. I was thinking something along the lines of John Eldridge's Wild At Heart or Way of the Wild Heart. While it did address masculinity and femininity, the focus was much more specific: defending the complimentarian (gender roles do exist within scripture, such as male headship, pastor/elders, and the sort) view and responding to the egalitarian (gender roles do not exist within scripture and there should be no difference in the manner men and women approach God or each other) view. The topic of gender roles in the church is not one of the most popular topics. In all fairness, I don't think I have ever sat through a sermon addressing gender roles, at least not in person. I have listened to a number of sermons which the gender roles were addressed from time to time but not in detail that would compare with this material. I have read 1 Corinthians 11, 1 Timothy 2, Ephesians 5-6, Titus 2, a number of times. Until a few weeks ago, I never read any articles/essays concerning the Greek text in those verses, or really exploring these topics in depth. Frankly, I was rather unaware of the research and doctrinal implications of these two views. Don't worry I won't attempt to condense the 400 pages I've read so far on this topic into this blog. I wanted to narrow in on what I noticed as a prime issue at the heart of this debate.

The first point I noticed, which has been a bit of a recurring theme among Christian debates, was the immediate approach to scripture. How does each side approach the scriptural support, lack of support, or silence regarding the topic at hand? Did one group tend to focus on arguing from experience vs. scripture? How did they go about trying to address a difficult or culturally unpopular instruction? Did the denial of one non-essential view overflow to a greater essential doctrine peril? One of the variables which make Christian debates particularly easy and painful at the same time is that no matter what, both sides need to rely on Scripture to have any ground. I say easy and painful because many arguments in the secular world cannot come to a solid starting point, yet painful because there should not be such levels of dissension regarding clear teachings of scripture. One side or another often finds themselves judging God's Word instead of humbly approaching it seeking to understand its mystery and submit to its authority.

The second point of controversy within the discussion of gender roles is the misunderstanding of domination compared to headship. Domination is the embodiment of might-over-right, overbearing, abusive, much of what defines popular culture's idea of masculinity. Instead of domination being regarded as the enemy for what it is, masculinity at large was assaulted. Men were told to be passive teddy bears that didn't hurt anyone, their feelings, or to even have a desire to inflict hurt. Some men laid down their masculinity by abdicating their roles as leaders, protectors, and providers. Other men sprinted into the other direction to become dominating womanizing thugs, who disguise themselves as gentlemen because they wear a suit. The modern man has been in crisis to define himself. Domination works for many men as a sense of identity because few women can compete in that arena. The fruit of domination expressed further expressed itself in violent crime, abusive attitudes, and general disregard of others. I would never attempt to defend justification for domination as it is the epitome of immature masculinity. This is the target of reference which egalitarians hone in on to destroy, and for good reason. I have yet to read and I don't expect to ever hear a scriptural defense for a dominating attitude. Headship is the embodiment of mature masculinity, one of my favorite sections of verses in Ephesians 5 describes headship. Christ is to his Church as a husband is to his wife. An excerpt from RBMW which also hits home:

At the heart of mature masculinity is a sense of benevolent responsibility to lead, provide for and protect women in ways appropriate to a man’s differing relationships...A man might say, “I am a man and I do not feel this sense of responsibility that you say makes me masculine.” He may feel strong and sexually competent and forceful and rational. But we would say to him that if he does not feel this sense of benevolent responsibility toward women to lead, provide and protect, his masculinity is immature. It is incomplete and perhaps distorted.

“Mature” means that a man’s sense of responsibility is in the process of growing out of its sinful distortions and limitations, and finding its true nature as a form of love, not a form of self-assertion." -pg 29

I recall some students in the high school group picking my brain on the infamous "woman submit" theme found in Ephesians 5:22-24, my response was twofold. One, a man not dare quote verses 22-24 without including 25-33, to do so is not only incomplete to the context of the text but it can lead one to wrongfully think scripture rubber stamps a dominating attitude, yet it immediately gives instruction to the husband on how to love his wife. I found it interesting that the instruction of submission, an action, for which men are more typically action-oriented was given to the wife. While love, an instruction of emotional-orientation, was given to the husband.

Christ perfected headship by his sacrifice, leadership, and love. This is to be the example that men are to follow that we might be mature men. I'm not saying to be mature Christian men, this is just to be a mature man. Because this is what it means to be a man, how much more should we look to the men in the Church fulfill this role in an exemplary manner?

Fair Oaks Rock Choir Tour 2008

Written 22 March 08

Rock Choir Tour '08

How can one encompass the experiences of this past week in written format? This was by far the most memorable tour I have been privileged to embark upon, does not seem sufficient. I recall the brainstorming process for this blog. Is this going to be a flurry of emotions and joys? Not exactly my usual prose. Would I write my thoughts about the direction of the youth ministry and the trust I have concerning this next year? Would I write exhortations and advice as though this is a farewell letter to those I bonded with over this past week? We'll see where it goes.

The knowledge that my stay in California is at its closing has me almost regretting I ever joined the Army. I once again must leave so many that I love. At the same time it is through the Army that I have been able to support so many students, be it in California, Germany or Slovakia. The end surely justifies the means. I do not question my belief in my duties as a soldier, however, I am anxious to resume the life in youth ministry. I am joyful about the week, I can't express that enough. Only a few of the seniors knew me before I was a soldier, as life happened I was only able to visit here and there. Be it a youth group or a handshake on a Sunday morning I was not connected with the students on the level of a true friend. Living with the new generation of students over the past week has removed the obscurity that once existed. I wish I could continue to know and guide the students in their high school endeavors, I know most of them will be on the eve of graduation when I return but I won't be starting from scratch.

I think I underestimated how much this tour would impact me. When I first thought about going on Tour it was such a longshot I did not seriously entertain the idea until months after and when it was a real possibility that I would go on tour I was wrapped up in ensuring I could honor my promise and contribute to the direction of the ministry. I believe this last week came together by God's grace and guidance, the coordination of so many variables not within my control is what I consider to be an Act of God. When I finally found myself in the midst of the students I don't think I seriously could have forecast what was to occur. I am a tour veteran but a Rock Choir rookie. Most of the students with whom I bonded with, did not know me prior to Tour. I was starting from scratch. I cannot be so arrogant as to say that I am a natural youth minister, despite me, everything fell into place.

I pray that I offered myself as an appropriate example to the students. I recall my days when I was the freshmen and what I have learned since over the years about youth ministry. I pray that I offered myself as the embodiment of love and not some goofy guy that they politely returned smiles to. There is a part of me that wishes I had spent more time focusing on discipleship, teaching theology, apologetics and the Christian worldview, or trying to prepare them for the life that awaits many of them in the coming months.

I recall a discussion with Missionary friends about the differences between High School and Jr High Ministry. I have always preferred high schoolers because they are closer to becoming adults. It is those years when they become responsible for their own acts. Teenagers start to form their character and identity. Junior Highers are often at this semi-child adult limbo filled with new chemicals that makes those years especially interesting. My friends noted that they preferred junior highers because all they ask is "Do you like me?” High schoolers approach you as "Do I like you?". I do agree and believe high schoolers can be more stubborn and difficult to minister to; however, I have yet to see a wall love cannot break through. I try not to discount the work of the Spirit but my experience with so many that have been in youth ministry and that have gone on multiple tours but have still walked away... it pains me to see it happen. I hope that every student I interact with will see God's will for their lives and live it accordingly. Our youth today does not recognize their potential, I think in much the same way my generation.

I have had this constant fear when I am with the students that they see me as nothing more than a goofy guy. While I do believe I behaved in a goofier manner that I normally do, I hope it was conveyed as the love I wish to convey to them that Christ has bestowed upon me. I constantly have the message Darin McWatters said at a "Guy's Talk." Based upon his observations the purpose of the adult human male was to be entertaining, nothing more than a jester really. He proceeded to challenge the guys present to be more. As far as a social forecast for the purpose of men, I think he was dead on. I have seen far too many young men and developing men that have bought into that mentality and performed excellently in that capacity. However, they did not go beyond it, they did not develop themselves as spiritual leaders and some have fallen from the faith. It does not pain me that they have walked the path they chose, it does pain me to know that they are missing out on so many of God's blessings if only they would remember who is God.

I do not believe I am a natural leader. I do not enjoy being the center of attention. However, seeing the condition of the faith and not being satisfied with what I have seen has brought me to learn how to be a leader. I was thinking the other day how interesting it is that every single member of the Army is trained to be a leader in some capacity. One must make a purposeful effort to avoid the opportunity to be a leader. When compared to the typical life of a civilian, many who grow into leadership get far fewer opportunities over the same amount of time. It is apparent to me that people who do not want to accept personal responsibility certainly would not want to be responsible for others. Yet, to delegate leadership for the good of all is the backbone of the modern Army. Too often leadership has been perceived as an opportunity to gain power. While it can be a grab for power the purpose of the given power is the victim of improper attitudes about leadership. I see every Christian man as a potential leader, I see them as better potential leaders than myself, and I hope to encourage those whom I interact to be those leaders.

I am attempting to mentally prepare myself for the next year, to remain faithful and continue to grow in my relationship with Christ as well as encourage others in their faith. It is difficult to know I am leaving the students once again. The hope that I will return to be there for them is what will get me through 2008.

You're Men Ain't Ya?

I hope the title kind of gave it away, but this one is directed towards the fellas.  Not to say my female friends ought not to read this, perhaps it might strike some interesting feedback with the other fellas you know.  I am reading Way of the Wild Heart currently; the title is one of the catchy phrases that John Eldredge was expounding upon.  This is an excerpt from the movie Open Range found in Way of the Wild Heart.

"In the saloon, they try to rouse the men of the town to action.  One of the local tradesmen says, "It's a shame what this town's come to," to which one of the cowboys replies, "You could do something about it." "What?" The frightened man replies.  "We're freighters.  Ralph here's a shopkeeper."  Then my favorite line: "You're men, ain't ya?"

            The author carries on suggesting that if you are a man you are a fighter.  He also points to biblical examples of population counts which counted the men and also counted every one of them as a fighting man (Numbers 1).  So I have been pondering these statements over the last few days and was curious about what my battles are?  What do I fight for?  I don't know how confrontational I really was prior to reading this book but I feel a fire being fed inside that I ought to be clearly fighting for something.

            It is suggested this desire is part of being a man and I think he's right.  I know this doesn't mean I need to re-class into an infantrymen to get up close and personal when I do happen to go to war.  I make clear that I choose not to fight over stupid things, and when I sense what I hold dear to be in danger, threat or ridicule, I have no problem with charging in.  I tend to keep most battles things that are fought in speech and intellect; I don't have the highest confidence in my physical contact abilities so I do avoid those confrontations very well.  To be honest, I don't think I have ever been in a fist fight in which I was actually fighting for something in such a way.

            I was pondering writing about the evils of the entertainment industry hold on men's hearts and minds.  I have had to reanalyze those thoughts altogether.  I am frustrated that so many millions of American men get caught up into sports, to watch and watch for no seen gain or purpose beyond the entertainment of watching a game.  I think some get a personal value out of knowing who is the best running back or how many touchdowns this player made or how many yards that player ran.  Similar to how some women find value in themselves by knowing powerful or popular people, are some men so satisfied or gather their self worth by watching and knowing sports data?

            I love to play sports; anyone ought to be able to attest I have no issues getting a little contact in sports.  I can't stand to watch a game though.  Sure I suppose there is much to learn from watching the professionals play.  How far is too far?  Sports, in itself are a great thing, to go out on a field and play is one of the ways I feel more like a man.  It is the same feeling as when we've scaled the waterfall on the Guy's camp outs, or kayaking out to the middle of Hume Lake.  The feeling you get after a long run or march is completed.  The sense of accomplishment, the body is exhausted but the heart is charged and I feel alive.  I did play a good game of football this afternoon so I got a little bit of that sensation still running through me.

            The connection between the battles that men ought to fight because we are men and our apparent fixation with sports is this.  We get caught up into watching and get comfortable with it.  I think this is true of our attitudes of sports and it carries over into the realm of the battles we should be fighting as men.  Our sense of leadership and rawness that is who and what we were created to be is stunted by getting close to the battle or the game.

            I am reminded by Darrin McWatters' frustrating "guy's talk" at Hume a few years ago in which he observed the purpose of the modern male is to be nothing more than comic entertainment.  That was the conclusion he came to according to his observations of the role we have in society.  The most frustrating part of that to Darrin, was that the vast majority of men are satisfied in that role, or worse believe themselves to be in that role as an actual purpose.  I like to think and wholeheartedly believe that we are here for more than laughs.

            I recall writing a bit about this in Role of Men, this blog I have a sense of fire inside me.  We need to be more active and assault the forces that assault us.  Not looking for a fight like an angry drunk but be precise about our battles.  As men we our appointed to be the leaders, we need to step forward with the "here am I, send me attitude" and stop fading in the back hoping we won't be asked to help.