I guess I'm a real runner now
Now that I have a real runners’ injury. You followers might remember me posting a while back about signing up for the Twin Cities Marathon. Well, my training had been going fairly well until this little setback. (Well, I’m praying it’s little, at least.)
A few days ago now my right knee cap felt a little funny — not hurting, really, just a little funny. Well, it felt funnier and funnier and now it almost actually hurts. I did some quick research and it seems to be a classic case of patellofemoral pain syndrome, aka “Runner’s Knee.” At least I’m not alone, I guess.
So I read these here articles at Runner’s World, Web MD , and in my running book and looks like I just have to back off on the training, stretch a bit, and try to strengthen my quads. Of course, this is the same knee that had ACL surgery back in college and I did never feel the leg was back to 100% strength-wise.
This is all fairly annoying, as training had been going well. I recently started doing my long runs not in Montreat, but Asheville, and I found the sidewalks, flatter terrain, and beautiful neighborhoods a joy to run around. So I’m a little stuck, I suppose, since my knee doesn’t hurt too much, but needs its rest. I’m going to take several days off, maybe swim a bit instead, and ice when I can. Huuummphf.
So there’s the marathon training update. I’ve still got two months until the race, so I’m not too down, but I do want to do all I can not to make this the first in a string of injuries. As they say, slow and steady wins the race.
image by LesKZN
Negotiating for a Better Future
Some denominations do it better. The transition into ministry process, and supporting pastors in negotiating Terms of Call, that is.
Way back when I was in seminary and taking the course Congregational Leadership and Administration, another student described the call process in his denomination. Much of the process was similar to my PC(USA) experience — with online forms and a national database — but something he said struck me as a brilliant idea, one which PC(USA)ers should consider.
In my denomination, when a pastoral candidate is offered the call by a Pastor Nominating Committee, the committee offers certain Terms of Call. These terms include descriptions such as how much vacation and continuing ed time one is alloted, but also the monetary terms. And, for those of you who’ve seen them before, pastor’s salaries are really confusing because they involve so many line items, insurance/pension, and (hopefully) self employment tax and the like. They’re not exactly easy for pastors to understand, let alone parishioners. So the pastoral candidate, after she receives the offered Terms of Call, usually mulls them over and makes a counter offer to the committee.
[Annoying challenge: some committees plan on the candidate asking for more money so do not offer all that’s budgeted while other committees would be aghast at a candidate asking for more.]
Anyways, so the PNC (or sub-committee) and candidate work out the terms and, presto, a call is agreed upon. But let’s think about that for a second. The pastor, all by herself, must negotiate with the committee made up of her future parishioners. She probably doesn’t know all the church’s financial info by this point, and certainly doesn’t know the history. She’s also unsure of her financial condition in the new town. And while I’m using the female pronoun, remember that female pastors’ salaries are lower than male’s in part, I imagine, because they do not negotiate as well on behalf of themselves as do men.
But that’s the problem. Which brings me back to my class. This student from another denomination said that a person is assigned — usually an elder in the congregation — to advocate for the pastor. So at the negotiating table there is not just a future pastor on one side and a committee on another, but an elder sitting in the pastor’s shoes, an elder advocating for her, an elder who knows the congregation and is informed of the pastor’s financial situation who can seek not the cheapest deal for the congregation, but a fair salary that will help the pastor better serve the congregation.
Now before anyone reads too much into this post, I am NOT the least bit annoyed at the committees and presbytery folks with which I am currently in conversation. So please don’t think I’m speaking of my own situation. Let me say that again: this isn’t about me and please don’t take it so. Whew, ok. That said, of course, my current situation did remind me of our class discussion and the fact that Terms of Call negotiations can become so individualistic rather than an act of Christian community. Negotiations are less about supporting one another, and more about a financial transaction.
The Church of Scotland has remedied the situation by paying all pastors the same salary based upon their years of experience. Congregations are also required to provide a manse for their minister. Now this setup provides problems of its own, but it certainly speaks to the communal nature of ministry, and it saves pastoral candidates from having to negotiate with a foreign committee on their own behalf.
So I wonder, how could the PC(USA) support pastoral candidates in Terms of Call negotiations? Have a few people per presbytery trained in the process act as a mediator? Have a local elder assigned to speak for the pastor’s best interest? Have the pastor in the neighboring church help out? I don’t know, but I’m sure the process can be improved.
Driven to Distraction
A recent (and thorough) NY Times article “Drivers and Legislators Dismiss Cellphone Risks” got me thinking about the ways of us peculiar Americans. The articles cites many a study that links cellphone use to distracted driving. But, I, at least, don’t think we need any fancy study to prove that. Unless you’re some kind of master multi-tasker (and you probably aren’t) I’m willing to say that talking on a cell phone while driving diminishes your ability to concentrate while driving. You can check the article for some studies, but I actually take that as a commonsense given. Talking takes thought, so less thought it given to driving.
So the more interesting question becomes: why do we still talk on cell phones while driving? If we know (at least intuitively) it’s less safe, why do it?
In Scotland, it’s illegal to talk on a cell phone (or “mobile phone” there 
) while driving unless one uses a hands free device. This is a national law. It’s a small sensible country — which loves their phones, by the way — and there’s been several fatalities over the years committed by people chatting or texting while driving. So, it’s illegal. That makes sense, after all. And I think it’s pretty big illegal (there was some story while I was there of a politician getting stopped for talking on his phone while driving and it was a huge embarrassment).
But in the US, while some local laws make it illegal to speak without a handsfree device, most state legislatures are hesitant to address the issue. And there’s certainly no big anti-cellphone movement to speak of.
So we know it’s unsafe. We know it kills people. We realize it’s far from a best practice. And we — well, most folks I know — still speak on phones while driving.
I wonder, then, if it comes down to an interesting question of practical ethics. Does the short-term convenience of speaking on a cell phone outweigh the relatively small risk we’ll injure someone while doing it? Is it a perception thing: everyone does it, so it must not be too bad. Is it a living-on-the-edge thing: I know this is wrong, but it’s handy and it sorta feels fun to be dangerous. Is it just a failure of leadership: nobody on the national stage is loudly leading the anti-cellphone charge. Or is it just that we can’t quite claim our better moral selves and not pick-up a ringing phone?
I don’t know, but it’s something I totally wrestle with myself. So, what do you think? It is immoral to talk on a phone while driving? Or to put another slant on it: is it sinful? You make the call.
image by Dragan Sasic
Update (a few more pertinent articles):
Mareen Dowd’s “Whirling Dervish Driver“
Matt Richtel “U.S. Withheld Data on Risks of Distracted Driving“
Book Review: McKibben's "Deep Economy"
In Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future, Bill McKibben writes,
“I would be content if this book helped shake our ingrained belief that growth is still an obvious necessary goal our our economy–content if the reader wondered a little the next time he or she heard some newscaster happily declare that the economy had gotten 3% percent larger. And content, as well, if my work helped shake the idea that there was no alternative to growth save miserable recession.”
Well, McKibben should be content, then, as his book did that and more for this reader.
McKibben has written for The New Yorker, and is the author of, among others, Enough: Staying Human in an Engineered Age, The End of Nature, and The Comforting Whirlwind: God, Job, and the Scale of Creation.
I found Deep Economy a great read, as it both did well to name some of the ridiculousness of our current consumer culture, and provided glimpses into other better ways.
The book is broken into five sections. The first, “After Growth” chronicles how the economy and society changed after the invention of the steam engine. This section includes a discussion on both the environmental impact of growth — basically, bad — and the sociological impact — not quite as good as we’d like to think.
I’ll let you guess what section two is about, “The Year of Eating Locally,” but it does have a more hopeful feel because a) it’s nearly possible to eat completely locally in many parts of the US and b) buying and eating local is a fast-growing trend.
The third section, “All for One, or One for All” investigates America’s passion for individualism through many different lenses, making the — almost Christian — argument for a new way to vision community.
Fourthly, in “The Wealthy of Communities” McKibben takes the reader deeper into such communities of mutual support and local-mindset who have a different idea of progress than just that of one where the individual prospers.
Finally, “The Durable Future” anticipates the positive places such a philosophy could take a culture. McKibben’s vision isn’t quite rosy, but I appreciated that it’s not as dour as some environmentalists.
Though sometimes a bit plodding with statistics and stories, I found Deep Economy to be a fair, though troubling assessment of where our consumer culture has taken us. At many points I appreciated how easily his prose and perspective could be adapted in Christian circles. I can only hope that more will heed McKibben’s words and begin to make choices, buy products, and sustain relationships that make our economy not just deeper, but richer too.
Sing an Old Song to the Lord
Last Sunday night I attended a hymn sing in Montreat. I’m not sure how long these Sunday evening sings have occurred, but they seem quite the tradition. The average age skews fairly high (as does Montreat’s cottager population in general,) but there’s also a good intergenerational mix.
As in many “y’all come” hymn sings, those who show up get to pick the hymns. The leader will then spice things up with some instructions as to whom might sing what parts and similar such funness. Heck, I’m a hymn nerd, I enjoy singing, and social situations are great too…ergo, I love the hymn sings.
But, last Sunday night, an odd thing happened. Or, at least, it was odd if you know just a little about Presbyterian history.
After thirty minutes of people shouting out hymns to sing, I thought it strange, but held my tongue. After another ten, I got real nervous. After a few more minutes, I gave up, spoke up, and took things into my own hands.
I requested we sing a psalm.
After 45 minutes, this group of mainly older Presbyterians had requested many a favorite hymn, several topical hymns for evening, and few noting July 4th, but not one psalm.
Psalm singing is our tradition. For many many years, Presbyterians ONLY sang psalms. Calvin was all about psalms. We still use many tunes from the Genevan psalter. Oh, and that Knox guy and his Scottish friends came up with a darn good psalter of their own. “What do Presbyterians bring to the interdenominational hymn sing pot luck supper?” Psalms. The answer is psalms. (Lutherans have some fancy fun chorales, Methodists bring Wesley…and Wesley, Anglicans at least have some chants, and so on…) But Presbyterians bring psalms, right?
Well, from this tiny sample size, at least, psalms haven’t stuck in people’s hearts and heads like they used to. I’m all for singing new texts, but I’m worried that those younger generations at the hymn sing will grow up without knowing, without singing their heritage. So I can’t wait for next week’s hymn sing. I already know what I’ll request. I have 150 options.
image by Julia Freeman-Woolpert
Connect Online
