He Really Was A Good Man

The last few weeks have been less than stellar for me. I spent Christmas and the week following in the hospital trying to get over a bout of pneumonia. During that same time my step father-in-law passed away. Being in the hospital prevented me from attending his funeral and I feel very badly about that. You see my father-in-law, Floyd Dees, was one of the finest men I have ever known.
I well remember the day I first met him. He had just married my wife's mother and they had come to Texas from North Carolina to "meet the family." They pulled up in front of our home and we went out to greet them and immediately a bond was formed. I think we played five rounds of golf that week including the newly opened Tour 18.

Over the years we traveled back and forth as did they and the bond between us only strengthen. You see Floyd and I have many of the same passions. We were both avid golfers. Floyd never seemed as "at home" as when he was on the golf course. He was generous as a playing partner and he was unrelenting as a competitor. Even when he was well into his 70's he could still put together a round in the 60's. I remember the day he and I were playing, (mostly for me as his COPD was already making playing hard) a young twosome joined us and were sort of pushing us. Floyd's competitive spirit got up and he played the back nine at the course in Hope Mills in 32 to beat them. Floyd was in his 70's. As we drove back to the house he was absolutely worn out. He said, "Bro. David, (that's what always he called me) I'm not sure it was worth it to beat them that way." I looked at him and said, "You know it was" and he chuckled a little.

The other passion we shared was fishing. I had begun fishing as child with an uncle and continued for many years. In fact for many years I carried two things in my car trunk - a set of golf clubs and a couple of fishing poles. We didn't fish as much as we played golf but I recall a few outings along the way. One was a day spent on Hope Mills Lake in Hope Mills, North Carolina. It was there, leisurely drifting on that lake that he told me about his growing up and the roll that lake had played in his life. Turns out he not only fished that lake but he was also baptized in it.

It was during those times that we talked about anything and everything. We talked about family; we talked a little church; we talked a lot of golf; drank gallons of coffee and ate a whole bunch of biscuits. It was during that time that I realized how much Floyd and my dad were alike. I suppose because the were children of their times but alike none-the-less. Both men didn't say much unless they had something to contribute. Both men were keen observers of people. Both men were Mechanics by trade. Both men served in combat during WWII in Europe. In fact, I remember him mentioning one day that he never got his "ruptured duck" when he was discharged. He said,  "I always wanted one to wear in my coat."  When I returned home I sent him one that my Dad had.

For a long time my wife and I would fly or drive to North Carolina to visit regularly. In fact we were set to go this past Fall when my own health issue got in the way. During those visits we would visit with their friends; I'd work on the house and property; and we'd just sit and visit for long periods. If his son were announcing local football, or coaching a girls softball game or just about anything else he would be there.  If I were in town I'd be there alonside him.  I remember we nearly froze to death once watching a football game.  I even got to attend a couple of Dee's family reunions over the years.

Everywhere we went it seemed folks knew him. We'd go in a store and it was "Hello Mr. Dees." Check in at any North Carolina golf course and it "Mr. Dees, good to see you." Seems everyone knew him and respected him.  They always referred to him as "Mr. Dees."  Scripture says, "A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches, and favor is better than silver or gold." (prov 21:1)  I don't know about the silver and gold but the "good name" and "favor" he had in spades.

He was a generous man. He was always giving. He'd give people money just to enjoy their reaction. I recall spending a day with him in his little shop where he worked on golf clubs and fishing stuff. We had already played a round of golf that morning and during the round he had me try a Big Bertha Driver he recently bought.  As we were finishing up he handed me a sack with some ball markers and towels from prominent golf courses. Then he reached over and handed me the Big Bertha and said, "You hit this club pretty good today I want you to have it."   Additionally, you could hardly ever buy his lunch. He was going to pay his own way and yours too.

He was a true family man. I do not believe any son had the unqualified support of his father like Floyd's son Eddie. He was proud of the man he had become for which refused to take credit. I give it to him any way. He loved his grandchildren and took great joy in them But he also loved his step children and grandchildren. It didn't matter how you were connected to him, if you were connected he was going to love you and honor you.  I wouldn't trade my own Dad for anyone else but if my Dad had not been my father I wouldn't have been disappointed to have Floyd Dees to be that man. As it was I had the advantage in many ways of having it both ways.  Floyd was the age of my father when my father died when I first met him. So, I'll just claim him as my latter years Dad.

Lastly, I observed that Floyd was loved by children of all ages. I watched as his nieces and nephews interacted with him and he with them. I know how my own grand children felt about him. Then, when I saw the photos of him as a young man I realized he was like that all his life. Babies and children just captured his heart and he theirs.  One of my granddaughter's kept his photo on her vanity mirror for several year. Only recently moving it.

One of the hardest things for me to watch, even from a distance, was Floyd's physical deterioration. I had watched my own father suffer from the same thing. It hurt because I knew from the beginning of his diagnosis what he was facing and could almost lay down the mile markers. It all came to an end on December 22, 2012. Floyd Dees went to be with his Lord having fought a good fight and finished his course.

Mark Shriver wrote a book about his father, Sargent Shriver, entitled "A Good Man." It is a great book and worth reading. Well I am here to tell you that Floyd Dees was in every way imaginable A Good Man! One that I am proud to have known and who I am personally going to miss.

What if you Knew You Only Had Days to Live.

If you knew you had only a few months to live, how would you use that time? Would you allow despair to overwhelm you? Would you find a way to still have a life? How would you keep the fear of death from ruining the days you had left? Many people have considered these questions in theory, but when Mike Toby, pastor of Woodway Baptist Church near Waco, Texas was diagnosed with stage 4 glioblastoma, a fatal illness for which there is essentially no real treatment and no cure, he now has to face them in reality.

Mike has decided not to undergo any treatment. He explains his reasons in a video made for the church where he serves. You can view the video and draw your own conclusions. But for me, speaking as a fellow traveler, I understand and applaud Mike's choice.

Mike and I grew up in the same town, Pasadena, Texas. He is 18 days younger than me. We attended many of the same schools and even graduated together in 1965 as part of what I believe may be the best graduating class Pasadena High School has ever produced. Some might argue with me about that but they'd be wrong. We knew each other and while we were not "best buds" we shared many similar experiences along the way.

We were both members of the Baptist Churches where we received Christ as our Lord and Savior and were baptized. Mike was on the west side of town and I was on the east side. He grew up under the tutelage of Dalton Havard at Richey Street Baptist Church and I under Estol Williams at Boulevard Baptist.  Our town was full of Baptist churches and during the 1960's God was in the process of calling out from those churches a cadre of young "preacher boys" who would go on to literally take the gospel to the ends of the earth.

We believed, at least in the little "school of the prophets" to which I belonged that God was going to do a great and mighty work through us. We didn't realize at the time that if He used us at all that would in and of itself be a great and mighty work. We "preached" at the drop of a hat whether it was in a Sunday School Class in our home churches or for some vacationing pastor. We didn't see big church or little churches back then. All we saw was a chance to preach the "Word" and call people to faith in Jesus Christ.

I remember Mike leading out at school in our Youth for Christ group. He organized and enlisted people to do the morning devotions and payers over the school public address system and was a major player in organizing our Senior Banquet as a kind of substitute (not really) for the non-dancing Baptist etc.  I recall that he was sitting at the table just next to the one occupied by me, John Crocker and Mike Harris and our dates. (BTW - who at our table knocked the parfait on the floor) Seems Mike had the flashiest jacket in the place.

 Mike and I even attended the same University (Houston Baptist College in those days) for a while. I was there to become a preacher and Mike was there to meet his future wife (I jest). They've been together ever since. That's when our lives went in different directions though would not really be that different. As he and I sought to follow the Lord's leadership for our individual lives and ministries he ended up more or less on the west side of the state while I went east. I digress.

My point is that we, me, Mike and a whole bunch of other young "preacher boys" in Pasadena,  a good beginning. We were surrounded by people who encouraged us and yes even praised our often less than stellar efforts at ministry. The one thing of which we were constantly being reminded by our respective pastors and fellow church members was that any positive responses to our efforts was the result of God's Spirit and not our abilities. We really came to believe that God would meet our needs, anoint our lives for service and bless our efforts. This became so much a part of our lives that if we held a service and no one trusted Christ we literally ached with disappointment.

I remember my pastor telling me as he paraphrased Philippians 1:6 that the same God who had begun a good work in me would never abandon me, would give me grace for service and life, would fight my battles for me, and one day bring the work started to completion in a manner appropriate to His will. Philippians 1:1-6 became so much a part of my life that it appeared below my signature on nearly every letter I have written.

Having said all that I want come back to Mike and his situation. His election and calling have been made secure in Christ Jesus so death is not his enemy anymore. He has faced those questions raised in the very first paragraph of this writing knowing that the same God who began a work in him as a lad in Pasadena, Texas is bringing that work to completion and in the process will not leave or forsake him.

He is doing what he learned from a child . . . to walk by faith until his faith shall become sight. He knows that whether or not he ever stands on another platform and preaches to another gathering of people that he is right now preaching the greatest sermon of his life. The title is "The Sufficiency of God's Grace." - Trials may be dark on every hand and we may not understand all the ways that God will lead us o the blessed promised land but this one thing we know is that He will guide us with His eye as we follow until we die then He'll take us by our hand and lead us into that wonderful Beulah Land.

I read somewhere where some one wrote that Mike had spent 35 years at FBC Woodway telling them how to live but now he is showing them how to die. I remember well standing at my father's graveside in Houston's National Cemetery as we committed my Dad's mortal remains to the earth and prayed a prayer of thanksgiving for his life and saying, "in living your life you taught us how we should live and in your death you taught us how to die. For that I give thanks to God."

One of the Deacons at Mike's church reportedly said, "The Lord is using him to teach us how to die. Considering the fact we all have to die, this may be the best sermon he's ever going to preach," I learned a long time ago there are a lot of reasons not to argue with a Deacon but I don't know if this is the best sermon he ever preached but it certainly is one of the most important. I rather suspect to it the conclusion to the one his life has been preaching for a long time now.  Someone has said, I'd rather see a sermon than hear one any day." Well here's your chance. Pay close attention because it will tell you something about the grace and promises of God. Just keep in mind that what Mike is able to preach today is really the end of a sermon that began in Pasadena, Texas when a young boy became a child of God by faith in Jesus Christ.

Should the Lord elect to perform one of His miracles I am certain no one will object. In the meanwhile our prayers are with Mike and his family.

Both John and Charles Wesley, founders of the movement that became known as Methodism, claimed that one of the distinguishing features of the Christian was, among other things, how they faced death. John Wesley is reported to have said, Our people die well."  There is a book by Joseph D. McPherson entitled, "Our People Die Well:" Glorious Accounts of Early Methodists at Death's Door. I highly recommend you read it.

So I end with the words to my Mom's favorite hymn:
(ti αντιμετωπίσει πρόσωπο με τον Χριστό Σωτήρα μου)

Face to face with Christ my Savior,
Face to face, what will it be,
When with rapture I behold Him,
Jesus Christ, who died for me?

Only faintly now I see Him,
With the darkening veil between,
But a blessed day is coming,
When His glory shall be seen.

What rejoicing in His presence,
When are banished grief and pain;
When the crooked ways are straightened,
And the dark things shall be plain!

Face to face! oh, blissful moment!
Face to face to see and know;
Face to face with my Redeemer,
Jesus Christ, who loves me so.

Refrain
Face to face I shall behold Him,
Far beyond the starry sky;
Face to face in all His glory
I shall see Him by and by!

My thoughts on This Veteran's Day

Today while at church there was a brief acknowledgement of the military veterans in the service. It was a simple affair . . .  one of those things where if you served in any branch of the military you were asked to stand up; if you were related to anyone in the service, Stand up. You get the picture. I suppose it was sort of obligatory to do being it was Veteran's Day.

However, as simple as it was, my mind turned it into something far more significant for me. As they were busy going through the almost rote observance my mind was remembering family members who had served.  Our family's military service to American began with Samuel Appleby who march with the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War and continues to this day. Appleby's and/or their kin have fought in virtually every war in which this country has ever been engaged.

But as proud as I am of that service record I was not thinking this morning of all those who served.  No, my mind was focused on a very elite group of family members. I was thinking of those family members who not only served but died as a result of that service.

As I sat their and they mentioned the Marine Corps I saw my father's youngest cousin, Billy Roy Appleby, a member of the 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, 1st Marine Division. just turned twenty-one by a month, as he suddenly felt the impact of enemy fire and slumped in eternal sleep to the frozen ground in Korea on November 3, 1950. 

Then they mentioned the Army and after a brief thought of my Dad dropping paratroopers in the early hours of the morning of the Normandy Invasion and then latter the entire week of Operation Market Garden I thought of his other cousin, Robert "Bobby" Key,  who flew the same kind of airplane my Dad, entered eternal rest in the fiery crash of his plane as it exploded on take-off from Natal, Brazil from saboteurs bomb. That day the Nazi saboteurs destroyed five planes and their crews.

Then the Navy and my cousin Charlie Hancock's name came to mind. He paid the price aboard a U.S. Aircraft Carrier somewhere off the coast of Vietnam in the 1960's.

I don't know why I thought of these men but I did.  But the real significance of all this is that while thinking of their sacrifice I also thought of my Grandfather's baby brother Jesse as he got the letter that his son had been killed in action and he was give a hand full of medals (Purple Heart, the Combat Action Ribbon, the Korean Service Medal, the United Nations Service Medal, the National Defense Service Medal and the Korean War Service Medal).  I wondered how my grandfather's sister felt as she got word from the army that her son had died in Brazil.  And how my grandmother's sister felt when word came that her grandson, a Navy Corpman. was dead.

I suspect they were experiencing what every mother, father, wife, and child of a U.S. Serviceman fears most as they say goodbye to their soldier and watch them walk away toward an uncertain but dangerous deployment.   So on this Veteran's Day I want to say, "Thank you" to all the Moms and Dads, Wives and Husbands, and Children who are left behind.  "Thank you for your service."

Germs Can be Sneaky

I just had to take a moment to welcome my newest grandson into my world. Bryce Bailey, my youngest daughters second son joined the rest of us yesterday with all the fanfare that such an event warrants. It was a happy day all the way around since both baby and mom are doing just fine.

However, his arrival was also the occasion for one of those nutty things that seem to happen only in a hospital setting. You know, a goofy rule that sucks the joy out of a wonderful experience. The world is full of these kinds of things but on this day this rule just seemed bigger than it really was . . . or was it.

First, unlike the day in which my children were born, it seems that virtually the whole family is invited o be present. I elected to step out. However, Dad and a couple of grandmothers were there when he arrived not to mention the doctor and nurses.  Within minutes of his birth, even before he had his first bath, there I was holding him in my arms. More to the point we were passing him around like he was a greeting card to be read by everyone present.

Within a few hours our daughter and new grandson were moved to a private room where we all gathered again to celebrate. Seems we just couldn't get enough of "baby Bryce." 

It was then  that the insanity of a hospital setting kicked in. Now understand that people from the age of 3 years to my age, let' just say "and older" had looked at, touched and yes even kissed on Baby Bryce. All of this was well within the rules set forth by the hospital for such things.  Then, one of our other grandchildren arrived and we were told that not only could she not see "Baby Bryce" but by coming through the doors she was in violation of some hospital rule that required non-family children to be at least 13 years old before they could visit in the room.

That would have been fine except instead of just stopping there the following explanation was given. "The reason for this rule is to reduce the risk of contamination for the new baby."  A rule that is not based in some sort of valid reasoning is bad enough but do they really believe what they are saying when they say it is to control contamination.

First, keep in  mind that the following people are allowed in the room and to handle the new born child: Immediate family members of all ages 1 year and up; family, friends and acquaintances ages 13 years and older; and hospital staff. People from all these groups had, as I have mentioned earlier had, already handled and kissed on this child.  But now, when a cousin who is ten years old arrives she is told she not only cannot touch but cannot see her newest cousin because she might contaminate the room.

The only conclusion I can draw from this line of reasoning is: germs, viruses, and bacteria are unusually discriminating. They only attach themselves to children 10 years of age and under who are not a brother or sister to the new baby. All of these other people going in and out of the room, holding and passing around the baby, not to mention kissing on him, are either germ free or the germs are incapable of leaping from them to the infant in question. Hence we must bar this  potentially contaminated group of people from celebrating with the rest of their family and friends the newest member of their family.

Of course more important than the insanity of the reasoning used by the hospital when setting down this rule (there may be some other reason for having such a rule I just can't think of one) and that it how it affects the kid that is excluded. No one like to be told they aren't allowed when everyone else seems to get a pass. I have to tell you that had my more even tempered wife not been there we would have been having a philosophical discussion about that rule and more than likely I'd been sitting in the waiting room with the 10 and under crowd.

I know that in the grand scheme of things it is not a particularly major thing but it seemed important at the time. Now what has this to do with anything . . . well probably nothing. It's just another one of the idiotic rules that non-thinking people in authority lay down to control the rest of us. Besides that it annoyed me.

BTW - As I left the hospital someone had placed a large A-frame sign in the main entry that informed me that children 16 and under were not permitted in patient rooms to help prevent the spread of the flu virus . . . I hope it works.

What do you think . . . am I over reacting?

What Others Think of You, Does it Really Matter?

I going to get a little cerebral on you today. You see, lately I have been giving a lot of thought to the question, “Does it really matter what other people think about you?”

On some level I suspect we all believe that it does We may wish that it didn't but alas we fear that at some level it really does matter. Over the years I have attended multiple seminars and workshops on leadership and other related subjects and invariably they have been torn between, “Yes it does matter what others think” and “You’ll never be a great leader if what others think about you is important to you.”  Essentially they end up saying, “You should just stop caring about what others think of you, or stop paying attention to other people’s opinions about you.”

Now I am going to go out on a limb here and say that what others think of you only matters if you allow it to negatively dominate your life and the way you live. Be careful here, I am not saying you should not be aware of other people’s feeling and thinking about you. Others people's feelings and thinking about you can be a great barometer for self evaluation. Just don’t give it more importance than it deserves and always consider the source.

Now having said that, if you are getting a lot of negative feedback from the people around you; when people seem to always be upset with what you say; how you say it; what you do; or how you do it; when those closest to you are seem to always be hurt and offended by your words and actions it is time to do some serious self-evaluation. It is time to start asking the question, “What is there about my attitudes, actions and/or speech that educes so many people to give us negative feedback?”  We really do need to hear what the people around us are saying. Why, because it will enable us to actually determine whether the problem lies within us and is drawing such negative reactions from people or is it from without and just causing us to feel badly.  

Keep in mind I am not talking about the occasional negative feedback. I am talking about a continuous thing that can be expressed by, "Why do people never seem to understand me," or "Why is it people always seem upset with me?" No one will be on great terms with everyone all the time. However, when we seem to always get a negative response it may be time to ask the all important question, "Why?"

Truth is it is easy to blame others. “I am the way I am because  . . . . and, you can name it. Someone or something else is always responsible for our being the way we are. We rarely take responsibility for being the way we are and we rarely try to discover why others have such a negative response to us. We just blame other people and our circumstances and never discover what lies behind all the negative feedback we are receiving.

Negative feedback virtually always causes us some level of emotional pain. And, when we are emotionally hurt by the words or actions of other people we seem to always engage in at least some period of feeling sorry for ourselves. We are the “good guy” and they are the “bad” guys. In short, we often find it easier to live in denial and just say, “They don’t understand me.” The answer is not denial but rather lies in becoming authentic. We simply must seriously consider that the negative response people are having toward us might actually be the appropriate reaction to how we are conducting our lives. They might really represent the authentic us.

Now having said all that we still have not really answered the question, “Does what others think of us really matter?” The answer is,”Only if it allows us to become are authentic self.” The philosopher is correct when he says we must start with, “Know thy self” and “To thine own self be true.”  The answer, yes but only if we use it to discover our own true self.

There is no getting away from this truth:  Our minds seem always to reject responsibility for the negativity directed at us. I recently read what I think is a profound thought that holds that external reality is always a reflection of the mind. That is, “Creation always happens from the inside out and not visa a versa.

I believe it was Jesus who said it is not what goes into a man that defiles him but what comes out of him. In short, regardless of what people think of us our real issues are internal not external. I am who I purpose to be. Your “personal” reality is your responsibility. Others just reflect back to you what that reality is.

So what to do? Well, you have choices here. You can continue to act and speak in ways that cause people to have a negative reaction to you and pretend the whole word is out of whack. You can decide to take a cognitive approach and argue with them that you are a victim of misunderstanding. That is, people don’t know the real you. To really know you is to love you. Problem, how can they really know you if your words and deeds are inconsistent with the authentic you. These are to always live a life of reaction instead of action.

The other choice, a little harder but much more rewarding, is to change the way you view the world. If we give off “bad vibrations” it is because we have a negative view of our world. Somehow we have to change our way of thinking. Biblically, Philippians 1:8 gives us some insight into how to do this when it says, “Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.” What requires initial effort will become habit and habit will eventually become lifestyle over time.
This is easy to put down in sentences and paragraphs but it is hard to do in life because we have already spent a lifetime getting where we are. Change is hard but its rewards are great. It means learning to weigh our words knowing that “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.” It is one of the reasons I have suggested for more than 40 years that folks take the advice given to me by A.O. Collins and read a chapter of Proverbs and a Psalm every day for the rest of their days. This all by itself will go a long way in enabling you to produce what the Beach boys called “good, good vibrations.”

In short, stop seeing everyone and everything in a negative light. The world is not out to get you. The world, for the most part doesn’t even know you exist let alone have any particular feeling toward you. People are not spending all their time thinking or talking about you. They have their own lives to live.
If you want love in your life start speaking and acting in loving ways. If you want peace then don’t say and do things that create conflict. If you want joy, be joyful. As Proverbs 18:24 says, “A man that has friends must show himself friendly, and there is a friend that sticks closer than a brother.” There is a key to having loyal friends or making friends in the first place. You have to show yourself friendly.

I am convinced that you must not try and escape your reality. It is in fact what it is. However, you can both learn from it and change it. Now I must tell you that I am a cognitive behaviorist at heart. That means we must know, understand and act. Once you know how you are and what you want to become then you make choices about how to get there and then you act. As Paul Overstreet wrote in one of his songs, Daddy’s come around to Momma’s way of thinking.”

So does it matter what others think of you? Only if it helps you discover who you are now and what you need to become the person you want to be.

The Carrot and The Stick

I recently saw a commercial on television in which a fellow was being recognized for something he had done within his company. All his fellow employees were gathered as were his supervisors and bosses. Even the company CEO was there for the recognition. After a lot of flowery and I am sure well chosen words of praise the employee was given a "certificate." His response. Was to say, "A certificate! A Certificate!! A CERTIFICATE!!!"  He then proceeded to kick over the trash can, knocked down a lamp, break a flower vase and generally pitch a fit all the while repeating the words, "a Certificate." Clearly he was not motivated in a positive way by the certificate.

When I was in college I was a Christianity and Philosophy major. However, I thought then and still think now that a few courses from the school of business are important. In one of those classes I learned what I have come today to know as the Law of Motivation 2.0 or more commonly known as the "law of carrots and sticks."  (For a full discussion of this I recommend Daniel Pink's book Drive.)

Basically this law of motivation says that people do their best work if they are appropriately rewarded . . . hence the carrot. The negative side of this rule holds that people will not do their worst work if we are penalized . . . hence the stick. Consequently our employers and even we ourselves have tried to motivate us to perform and achieve desired goals by either rewarding our good stuff and penalizing our bad stuff.  Generally the reward has been in the form of some sort of monetary compensation, i.e., the promise of a raise or bonus etc. and the penalization the withholding of the same.

However, as I have surveyed my own life I have discovered that the "carrot and stick" approach has never really worked for me. To be sure, during my working days, I had to pay attention to the carrot. Like everyone else I had to pay the bills. However, having said that I can truthfully say that money has never been a major motivator in my life. 

I do appreciate all the salaries, raises, bonuses etc I have received over the years. Everyone, including myself, wants to be fairly compensated for their time and work. Truth is, none of us would continue on a job where our compensation did not meet our basic life needs. If the compensation level is too low we become dissatisfied and our performance levels drop.

For me it was always something more than the carrot that motivated me. Often it was the challenge of the task. I needed a task commiserate with my interests; that challenged my abilities; that facilitated my desire to grow personally and professionally; and that provided a sense of achievement and satisfaction.

It is absolutely true that I was always happier and did my best work when I did not have to worry about "paying the bills."  However it is equally true that I was happiest, more productive and more creative when I was given the freedom to focus on creatively taking on a task.  In fact, some of my very best work has been produced free. You see, my reward for any task well performed is the sense of self-satisfaction I receive. They money is nice but the satisfaction of a job well done is better.

What I discovered is that I am little motivated by external stimulus. For me, motivation comes from within. Over the years I've had this discussion with Human Resource people and to a man they just can't get past the notion that we must be externally incentivize (the carrot and he stick) if we are to achieve. I, on the other hand, contend that to get the very best we can do we must be internally incentivize. 

So, for me at least, here is the deal. Pay me a living wage and then stress the autonomy I will have in my tasks; the challenge to master new skills along the way; and the opportunity to do something that has purpose and really matters.  If there has to be a reward make it unexpected and not a contingency reward. Allow me to focus on the task not the carrot. Truth be told the reward if offered could even be of a non-tangible nature such as an sincere  "attaboy." 

Would I turn down a fiduciary reward? Probably not. Would such a reward induce me to work harder or better on the next task? Probably not. Would I feel indebted to hose giving the reward? Again, probably not. I would be appreciative. You see for me, the reward has always been in the "job well done."

What gets your juices going?

The Inmates ARE Running The Asylum!

I don't normally chime in on politically charged issues on this page. I like to keep it light, informative and just plain fun. However, recently I saw where two Mayor's on "Official" city letterheads took on a highly successful, ethically impeccable, and extraordinarily clean and courteous business that produces some of the best fast food chicken in the world because of the religious views of its owner.


Now I am not here to talk about the issue on which they spoke out, i.e., "Gay Marriage." In my view they are entitled to hold whatever opinion they want and to express that opinion.  You should also NOT try and draw any conclusions as to my own views on that issue from anything I write here. 


Here's the deal, the owner and founder of Chick-fi-la is a devout conservative Christian holding very traditional and orthodox Christian beliefs. When he started his business he decided that it would be a grand experiment. He would run his business base on good sound business principles and (this is important) as long as they do not violate his conservative Christian convictions.  He did this and he did it successfully and in this regard more people should follow his example.


Now, many years later his business is thriving and his convictions are still in place. Because of this he is interviewed and asked about the role of his Christian convictions in his business and he opening and honestly answers each and every question. Then, during the course of the interview he is asked his view on "Gay Marriage" and he just as openly and honestly answers the question as he has every other question he has been asked. So far, so good . . .not a problem.  You need to read what he actually said to get the context. That's something apparently neither the mayor of Chicago or Boston has done . . . but then they are politicians and might not know the meaning of information it it true context.


Let's see what he did not say. He did not say that Chick-fi-la would not hire someone who is in a gay marriage, he did not say he would not serve someone who was in a gay marriage. Fundamentally what he said was that he did not believe that Gay marriage was legitimate under the principles laid down in the Bible. His view is that True marriage (some would say traditional) marriage is between one man and one woman. He is not commenting on "Gays" in particular, in polygamy, serial marriages, living together without benefit of marriage or any other of issue on which I am certain he has equally strong views. 


You may feel that what he believes about these and any other issues you want to take up are important and maybe they are. But, for me, the issue is not what he believes but what these Mayors did. In their effort to be supportive to the Gay community which is within their rights they did something more egregious and dangerous. They did not express a personal view of support nor did they express their personal objection to his viewpoint. They did not just say "I for one" (individual) will not patronize his business and urge all you who agree with me to do the same.  No they engaged in what is essentially official oppression.


How you ask? Here's how . . . when they reached down and picked up the official letterhead of the city of which they are Mayor, wrote their views upon it, signed their name to it as Mayor of the city, and released it to the press the were guilty of Official Oppression. They are entitled to their opinions but they are not entitled to use their office in that kind of way. Today it is Chick-fi-la, who will it be tomorrow?   I believe the City Councils of both cities should reprimand them both . . . not for their views but for the way the chose to use their office . . . they used it as a means of official oppression of a lawfully established business.


We cannot tolerate official oppression at any level of government. The government is there to serve ALL the people and not just the people with whom the Mayor agrees. As an officer of government they may certainly express personal views. They cannot, however, be allowed to do so in their official capacity.


There are a lot of reasons for objecting to these Mayors or any other government officials injecting themselves "officially" in any of these kinds of things.


Martin Niemöller spoke for me and thousands of men like me when he said that, when the Nazis attacked the Communists, he was a little uneasy, but, after all, he was not a Communist, and so he did nothing; and then they attacked the Socialists, and he was a little uneasier, but, still, he was not a Socialist, and he did nothing; and then the schools, the press, the Jews, and so on, and he was always uneasier, but still he did nothing. And then they attacked the Church, and he was a Churchman, and he did something--but then it was too late.


I do not want the government singling out one company or individual for attack. If there needs to be a policy then let the appropriate governmental body develop one. If there needs to be a law then let the appropriate government legislative body enact one. Let it be done in the "people's houses" (legislative bodies) after appropriate debate and discussion . . . . Not Mein Führer issuing and edict. This is the big issue here and a slippery slope we do not want to go down!


It is fine for non-governmental  groups to oppose or support Chick-fil-a or any other business whose business model they do or do not like. It is not ok for Government officials to do so.

It is my experience that most of us can find a way to work it out. Truth is most of us are "a little bit country and a little bit rock-n-roll." That is, we want to live our lives somewhere in the middle. We do not want extremes to rule the concourse of our lives. And yes, I am aware that might mean that extreme in my mind might be a little to the left or right of where I am on an issue. But that's what makes for the debate isn't it  . . . and debate is a good thing.

Here is my answer to the mayors and everyone else: If you are pro "Gay marriage"  and don't like Truett Cathy's views . . . don't eat at Chick-fi-la . . . don't support them by patronizing them. If you are not pro "Gay marriage" and agree with Truett Cathy . . . then support them by eating there. If you don't care one way or the other what Truett Cathy thinks do what you want. As Shakespeare might say, "To eat or not to eat, that is the question."  You make the call based on your appetite, your convictions or any other reason you choose. I'll do the same.

Happy Birthday America!

This week we will be celebrating the 4th. of July or as I prefer to call it, Independence Day! Independence Day is one of my favorite holidays and one that I believe every American regardless of station of life ought to be able to enjoy.  I love John Adams' original idea of how to celebrate the occassion. After the Declaration of Independence was signed He said that every year thereafter people around the United States would celebrate the occassion with parades, fireworks, music, toasts, speeches, etc . . .  and so we should and so we have.

Now in 1776 while there were a few small celebrations the event was largely just another day in the life of the people of the new country. A war was still raging and that took center stage at the time. However, in 1777 an eleaborate celebration was staged that contained many of the elements included in today's celebrations. There it was, Adams' picnics, fireworks, fun & games, cannons being fired and speeches being made as a nation celebrated it birthday. Let's celebrate and not castigate!

I know I will be continuing that tradition albeit celebrating by means of modern technology in patriotic events being held all across the country.  In every case there will be as Adams predicted, "fireworks, music, toasts, speeches" and everything will be decorated  in red, white and blue and a large dose of capitalism as venders hawk their goods. But my focus will be on celebrating the nation's birth and the concept of "We the People of the United States" and the establishing of "A more perfect Union."

I hope that every American and friend of America will celebrate the day for what it really is: the anniversary of our  declaration of our independence as a nation and our intention of forming a  "more perfect union". . . a distinctively American Republic with a governement, as Lincoln would express it, "of the people, by the people, for the people."

May we take this day to recommit ourselves to see to it that this governemnt does "not perish from the earth" and remains committed to the proposition that "all men are created equal by their creator." Franklin's challenge when he said in answer to a question by a Mrs Powel, "A Republic, if you can keep it” still applies today.

The Fourth of July . . . Independence Day . . . should be a day of national unity. It should be the one day out of the year where we put aside our religious and political differences; cast aside our economic and cultural distinctions; and abstian from vitriolic speech. I hope that the media, both national and local will join in the celebration and refuse to carry or broadcaste anything that doesn't exhault America. Let them show us the national celebrations as they take place in the smallest of hamlets to the greatest of cities.  Let them show us at our best. They can go back to the other on July 5th.

Let's make it the one day of the year when we stand up and say with heart felt pride, "I am proud to be an American," and to paraphrase Lee Greenwood, I will gladly stand up, next to you and extol her on this one day. Make no mistake about it, I love this land we call the USA.  May she continue to enjoy God's blessing.

So it is that I invite both the rich and poor, the famous and obscure, the conservative and liberal, the learned and unlearned, the powerful and the weak, the healthy and the infirm, . . .  I invite us one and all to stand together and Pledge our Allegience to our flag, sing our national anthem and say as with one voice, "I am proud to be an American!"

Father's Day is a Coming . . . So What's It To You?

Father's Day is this coming Sunday.  I want to thank all you dad's out there who do so much to make your children's lives richer. Don't let anyone or anything minimize your role as a Dad. You may well be the single most important person in your child's life. This will be true whether your children are small or grown.  They will feel your influence in their life as long as they live and long after you are gone. You may not really be a Superman but in their eyes, if you do it right, you'll always be the super man in their life.

Father's Day is significant to me on a number of levels.  When I was a kid it was just another day second to just about every other "special" day on the calendar. It certainly played second fiddle to Mother's Day.  However, as both myself and my children have grown older the day has become more important to me than when I was a child.

First, Father's Day reminds me that I am a father, albeit one whose children are grown. I often reflect back over my years of parenting wonder if I was the best dad I could have been. I have long since concluded that the answer to that is "probably not."  Oh, I think I did the best I knew how and as the number of children grew so did my "dad" skills. I really need to apologize to my oldest children. In many ways they were a part of my learning curve.  When they were born they were sent home with us and no one gave us an instruction book . . . we had to learn on the fly.  However, as I reflect on my children I can say without reservation I am very happy and proud of the adults they have become. So I may not been the best dad but I did the best I knew how and I was as a preacher friend of mine often said, "adequate."

For me Father's Day is a day of  both Thankfulness and Sadness. I am thankful for my own father. He was the most patient man I ever knew. From my earliest years I was always welcome in his work space. He never gave me many principles of life to learn. Instead, he went one better. He allowed me to watch him as he lived out his own principles.  Most if not all the commendable qualities I have I learned by just being with him as he went about the business of living life. To be sure he had his flaws but his nature and character just made the flaws seem insignificant. It's hard to believe that this Sunday he will have been gone for 29 years and yet I still learn from him.

Perhaps the reason Father's Day evokes memories of my father that are so poignant to me is that it was on June 19, 1983 that he died. I was saddened all the more because in was also Father's Day. While I took solace in the fact that he was that day spending Father's Day with his father and his Heavenly Father I still wished he was spending with me. I have wished that every year since. As I said in a previous posting . . . he was in every way my hero.

I was 36 years old, just a year older than he was when I was born, when he died.  In those 36 years he never had much in the way of material things to give me. Oh he did the best he could and often better than he should to give me what I needed but those material things were not the real gifts. He gave me something far more valuable . . . he gave me as much of himself as he could and far more than I ever realized. The older I get the more of him I see in myself. Today there is just a whole lot of him in me.  

In my 65 years I have met many men who were giants among men. Some have been men of power and others men of wealth; some men of great intellectual prowness and others with unrivaled talents; some were great benefactors while others were strong leaders . . . but I have never met a man more significant to my life that the man I call Dad.  He really did show me how to live and how to die.  I remember saying just that in my prayer at his graveside as I thanked God for this man I called "Daddy."  I said then and believe now that "in living his life he taught me how to live and in his experience of death he showed me how to die." I believed that then and I believe it now.

I don't particularly have any words of wisdom to impart about Father's Day itself nor do I have any list of principles that if followed will make you a great dad. I would just encourage every dad to not just give your children things. And don't just give them the things they want. Give them what they need . . . a Dad. Give them as much of yourself as you can. Believe me, there will come a day when both you and they will be glad you did.

So to all you Dad's out there I say . . . HAPPY FATHER'S DAY!

My Memorial Day Hero . . . My Dad!



Mom and Dad: Their Wedding Day

 Today my mind has turned to the holiday we are celebrating . . . Memorial Day.  I was reminded by a relative that "Soldiers don't start wars; Politicians start wars...Our soldiers just do their part to protect the rest of us."  I don't know whether or not this statement is totally accurate but I do know that Soldiers don't start wars but when wars begin it is the soldier who protects the rest of us. For that I am grateful beyond words to express it. I am grateful to the soldiers who have stood ready to defend this nation through years of peace and for those who faced-down our enemies in time of war. From the men who wore the Continental Blue of the citizen soldiers in Washington's army to those now wearing the camouflage of today's military I am grateful.

On a personal level I could mention Samuel Appleby and his service in George Washington's Continental Army, or Robert Appleby who fought in the war of 1812. I might mention Robert Key who died in Natal, Brazil during WWII or perhaps Bob Appleby who laid down his life in Korea. Then there is Charley who died aboard the Kitty Hawk during the Vietnam War.  So many in our family have served with distinction.    However, when I think of soldiers I always think of my own father.

As a child I used to play with his medals and campaign ribbons. I didn't know or appreciate what they represented then like I do now. Then they were just another plaything for me. Today they serve to remind me of just how much of a hero my dad was.

My father was, I believe, typical of most of the men who became soldiers in his day (1942-45). He was not a career soldier . . . he was a farmer/mechanic born and raised in central Texas. But, the nation called and off to Fort Sam Houston he went where he became a part of the United States Army Air Force.

After a brief basic training and some advanced training in B-17's it was off to England by way of Iceland. He arrived in England and was assigned to the IX Army Air Force where he served as a crew chief  for the 52nd Wing's 315 Troop Carrier Group's 34 Squadron. Make no mistake about it . . . this was not a transport outfit . . . . it was a combat squadron!  These men flew un-armed and un-armored aircraft at slow speeds and low altitudes into heavely occuppied areas under heavy enemy fire.

During his 13 Campaigns he saw it all. He dropped paratroopers early on the morning of D-Day (the Normandy Invasion) and for a week during the famous Market Garden (A Bridge Too Far) receiving the Air Medal for his involvement. He supplied Patton's 3rd army and flew out wounded soldiers. I recall his only comment about these young men was as he shook his head, "They were just boys." He truly knew and appreciated the cost of war. He was 29 years old when he entered the service and most of the men he carried into battle and brought out again were under 20 years of age . . . . mere boys in his eyes. When the war ended he flew liberated prisoners of war back to England.

Dad never said much about the war. I recall on one occassion asking him about his war experience that he replied, "I have already had to live that war once and I don't feel like reliving it today." Then he would tell me about some funny non-combat war experience with a few of his friends and I'd catch a glimse in his eye that he was now a time-traveler in his own past. I was to learn more about his wartime experiences after his death when I attended one of his outfit's reunions. It has been through my contact with the men with whom he served that I learned just how much of a hero he truly was.

When the war ended and his services were no longer needed he went home and took up where he left off . . . . he opened a small mechanics shop and life went on. I don't think anyone ever said, "Thank you for your service" to him . . . . but then he never expected it. After all, in his mind he was "just doing what had to be done."

Dad has been gone since 1983 and he is still my soldier hero. Today, I say, "Thank you for your service."

Married For A Life Time . . . How Does That happen?

Today I attended a reception for some friends who were celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary. It was a great time with them, their families and friends celebrating together. I congratulate them on 50 years together and send my best wishes for many more years together.

While I was sitting there enjoying the food and festivities my mind flashed back to an experience I had sometime around 1991 or so. Another couple I knew was celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary and I had stopped at a PharMor store to get a card. When I handed the cashier the card she looked at it for a moment and then said, "I didn't know people actually stayed married that long anymore."

It does appears to be the exception rather than the rule in our day. But, even in our cynical and jaded times it does still happen . In fact, in 4 years my wife and I will actually be celebrating our own 50th. wedding anniversary. So yes Virginia there is a Santa Claus and yes people do stay married to each other for a lifetime. Oh I know it is becoming less common than it once was but it does still happen.

I suppose if you were to ask people in general how it is possible for people to stay married for so long you'd get a number of responses. Chief among the answers would probably be that they stayed together because "they loved each other."  Now I would hope that couples who get married actually love each other or at least believe that they love each other at the time they married.

After nearly forty years of active ministry I have never counseled a single couple or performed a ceremony for a couple who did not profess their love for each other. However, I know that many of those marriages ended in divorce within a few years . . . some within a year. There are, no doubt, a lot of reasons for those marriages not succeeding. Apparently while "love" may have brought them together it was not enough to keep them together.

Now I don't want to get involved today in a long discussion of was it really love or was it lust that brought them together. Nor do I want to explore whether it was "real" love or an infatuation or perhaps obsession with each other that brought them together. I don't even care whether or not it was an "arranged" marriage." Those may be interesting and profitable discussions for another time but don't really have much to do with my curiosity today.

I actually know a few couples who admit that when they married they did not love each other. In one case the marriage was a way out of a bad home and they other because there was no home. These were marriages of convenience. The remarkable thing is that one couple has been married for more than 50 years and the other more than 45 years. Love for them came later. So much for being in love explaining why couples stay married.

In my experience virtually everyone for whom I performed a wedding ceremony professed that they were in love. I just take them at their word. Were they in love? . . . maybe they were and maybe they were not. I might have questioned their understanding of  love, their maturity and/or their commitment but never that they believed they were in love. You see I am not interested in why so many marriages fail. I want to know why some last a lifetime.

I have a theory about why some marriages last a lifetime. I have often expressed it by saying, "Love may bring us together but commitment keeps us together." People who live together as husband and wife for a lifetime bring some quality to the relationship that equals longevity. I believe that common quality is a sense of commitment. They are committed to their marriage and making it work. Commitment is certainly strengthened where there is a growing maturity, a developing wisdom, and a deepening loyalty.

People may be in love with each other when they marry but they do not always feel or act lovingly toward each other. Marriages that last face all the same challenges of life as those that do not. Marriage is never easy . . .  it is always demanding . . . and there will be plenty of opportunities for calling it quits. It takes a lot of commitment to persevere. But those who do eventually reach a point where they cannot even image life without each other. Those are the couples who will celebrate a lifetime of loving each other.

Neil Sedaka wrote a song called "Love Will Keep Us Together" and it believe it will if it is accompanied by a good healthy dose of committed to each other.

One More Word About HBU's Name Change

I have written extensively, both here and in other places, about the Board of Trustees appointing a 14 person committee to look into possibly changing the name of Houston Baptist University. It clear from what I have written that I am opposed to any name change. Today's posting will be my final word on the subject until a decision on the name change has been reached.

I have two intentions in writing today. One is to commend and thank the Trustees on the committee exploring the possibility of a name change and second to offer a suggestion if they do.

Today I want to begin by saying a word of gratitude to Mark Denison and his committee for the hard work, time and energy they have invested working on this assignment. I am pretty sure none of these Board members woke up one morning and said, "Let's think about changing our name."

I am also aware that they were not obligated to announce what they were doing let alone hold a couple of Town Meetings. These meetings were on relatively short notice and held on the HBU campus making it difficult for many of us to physically attend. However, we were able to participate via a live Internet stream of both meetings.

Already the The Houston Chronicle and the Houston Business Journal have already picked up the story. You can actually cast an opinion vote on the Collegian's, the University's campus newspaper, website.

I am pretty sure that no one in their right mind would voluntarily take on such a hot button issue. There is no doubt in my mind that this came from the University's administration and is connected to one of the pillars of their "Ten Pillar" Vision statement.

In my view the word "Baptist" promptly displayed in the name on a sign serves to daily remind us who we as an institution. It is bad logic and thinking to draw from having the word "Baptist" in one's name that the University is for Baptists only. The same is true of the conclusion some have that it speaks of a "Bible" School. Based on a blog by a member of the school's marketing department this seems to be the view the school's marketing department has adopted. Their job is not to recommend the easiest way for them to do their job. It is to take who we are and market it. They seem have forgotten that the fundamental job of marketing is to raise awareness of our enterprise so that the public will not simply know our name but (1) know that we exists, (2) know what we offer in the way of a products and/or services, and (3) why they should attend or support us. Public Relations does much the same except (1) it is inexpensive and (2) it is weighted on physically being in the community through as wide a range of civic and community groups as possible. This includes, Rotary Clubs, Lion's Clubs, Chamber of Commerce meetings, churches and church groups, and a thousand others. This is where you utilize you alumni. We are the door to many of these groups. I don't know about you but I graduated 43 years ago and the only thing I have ever been asked to do is write a check. I wonder how many of the 15,000 plus alumni have had the same experience. If it is to work in the long haul we must be clear, open and honest about who we are. Today we declare we are no longer a Baptist School. How long before we declare we are no longer a Christian school? I know this IS NOT the intent of the present action but it might just be an unintended consequence of a name change.

If the University is to work over the long haul we must be clear, open and honest about who we are. By removing the name Baptist from our name, documents and our literature we are by omission declaring that we are no longer a Baptist School. How long before we declare we are no longer a Christian school? I know this IS NOT the intent of the present action but it might just be an unintended consequence of a name change.

When Mid-Continent Bible College changed its name to Mid-Continent University the President at the time, Dr. David Jester, came up with the idea to create two major divisions. One, the Baptist College of the Bible. This was the old Bible college. The other thing he did was to create the Baptist College of Arts and Sciences. This was done in an effort to keep "Baptist" in the forefront of who the school was theologically. while recognizing other realities. As this transpired they also strengthen their by-laws to clearly state that (1) the University's world view was distinctively Christian and that (2) that all Bible college professors must be Baptist. However, the real kicker in their action was that they adopted a "death star" provision in their by-laws that stated that if the school ever strayed from those principles, it would shut down and sold off.

I am NOT suggesting they should change its name. To the contrary, I oppose it at virtually every level. And, I am certainly not suggesting that adopted a death star provision. I do believe there should be a "fail-safe" provision that will preserve both our Christian and Baptist heritage and core.

However, if the name is destined to change then the University owes it to that hundreds and thousands of Baptist who have invested their lives in the school to preserve it's Baptist heritage. This could be done through something as simple as expanding the present Department of Christianity to College status and calling it the Baptist College of Biblical Studies or something like it. It is not enough to preserve the heritage in footnotes and documents of the past or a museum display. Our Baptist heritage should not be just acknowledged with a nod of the head.

Our Christian core values must permeate the entirety of the University an our Baptist heritage must be enshrined through some major ongoing education element. A Baptist College of Biblical Studies would go a long way in doing that. You could even do it without changing the names of the Atwood Buildings.

I also believe that such an announcement should be made at the same time as a name change is announced. By the way in coming up with a name you might want to consider that the name Morris adorns at least one other college in Texas already . . . Lon Morris. Not to mention a number of institutes and public schools. Let's Keep Houston Baptist University just that Houston Baptist University.

Let There Be No Doubt -- I Am A Baptist! There I said it.

As you may know from the past several posting I have been having a running conversation about the name change proposal for my Alma Mater, Houston Baptist University. Last Monday evening I attended via a live Internet feed a Trustee Town Hall meeting. The meeting was handled very well . . . pretty much as I expected. Ive been involved in these things on both the "hot seat" and the audience sides and have come to find that they all seem to follow the same pattern. It seemed to be principally focused on "how we got here" and "the benefits of a name change" with an acknowledgement without delineation that "there are some negatives." However, it is not the meeting itself or the issue for which it was held that is on my mind today. It is two things that I heard at the meeting that may or may not be connected.

I begin by saying there is not enough space here to say everything I would like on this. I just want to touch on one or two items. I am troubled by the superficial attitude toward the word "Baptist" in the name. Apparently the only reason for wanting to remove it is that a survey of non-Baptist potential students and their parents as well as a smattering of non-Baptist religious leaders stated that it would make it difficult for them to attend or donate to the University. As that survey was explained it consisted of about 1100 total people: 300 per potential non-Baptist students; 300 parents of potential non-Baptist students; the faculty; the Alumni Officers; selected Alumni and a few others. I could have saved them some money and told them what the results would be. What I am saying is that in my judgement the survey was flawed and the data it produced not very useful to an honest evaluation of the issue. Again, I digress.

The conclusion drawn from that survey is that the name Baptist is a barrier to recruiting and fund raising because it has taken on a negative connotation by the public in general. Now what got my attention was that the word Baptist had a negative connotation to the public. In defense of the founding father's choice of name it was explained that when the school was founded Baptist was a respected name but that over time and for a lot of reason it now has become a burden too heavy to carry. This movement was started by mega-churches or those whose church growth goals included becoming a mega-church. I could not help but notice that the great mega-church, Second Baptist Church of Houston, that once was known as "The Fellowship of Excitement" has placed its name in back on its signage and done so in huge letters.

Don't miss understand me. I am not questioning whether or not the word Baptist has become a burden for those who wear it and a barrier to those who do not agree with our theology. I would question whether or not it has ever been held in high regard outside of Baptist circles. However, it is a burden because it calls on us to live up to a high standard of Christian living and it is a barrier for the same reason. I see nothing in the meaning of the word etymologically, theologically or morally/ethically that would cause me to be pull back from wearing it proudly.

In fact, if I read the founding documents of my University correctly, that is precisely what the founder intended. They wanted a Christian institution that presented the gospel from a distinctively Baptist perspective. They wanted everyone to know that when you enroll in this University you are going to be exposed to the Gospel of Jesus Christ from a Baptist theological perspective. That's why from the beginning all the Christianity teachers were Baptist. That's why all the administrative staff, and virtually all the faculty was Baptist. It was to insure that in every discipline being taught on the campus there was a Baptist witness to the Gospel. These were by-in-large middle ground Baptist.

Now understand I am a Baptist and that means I was already a Christian when I became a Baptist. You see my theology teaches me that you cannot be a Baptist until first you are a Christian. That is the door through which you must pass to become a part of the Baptist family. Every Baptist church charter, Constitution and Bi-Laws I have ever seen clearly state that the membership of a Baptist church is restricted to those people who have become believers in Jesus Christ as their Savior and Lord and have been Scripturally baptized.

Not all Christians are Baptist but all Baptist are supposed to be Christian. Main stream Baptist have never taught that they were the only people going to heaven. What they have taught is that only people who by faith receive Jesus Christ into their heart and life will go to heaven. It is not the denominational label that defines them as Christian . . . it is their relationship with Jesus Christ. Baptist reject all teachings that would allow for an alternative way of becoming a Christian. Baptist are not the only ones going to heaven but they are going to heaven the only way one can.

The term Baptist defines the kind of Christian I am as to doctrine. I am a Christian by birth and a Baptist by choice. Being a Baptist is my pedigree as a believer. Other Christian pedigrees would be Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran, etc. Over time I have come to question whether or not there has been a Christian whose pedigree is pure. I am grateful to God that I can be called Christian and I am proud to be called a Baptist.

Our task is to so live and express our distinctive Baptist Christian faith so as to remain true to its tenants and to do so by living as peacefully as possible with all men. We as Baptist must conduct our business in and with the world at such a level of integrity that the non-Baptist world will see who the "real" Baptists are. Is that easy? No, in fact, it is nigh unto impossible. It requires us to lean heavily upon the indwelling Christ.

I do not believe that the word Baptist" or for that matter the word "Houston" in the schools name presents a significant problem regarding recruitment and/or fund raising. I believe both recruitment and fund raising require a clear explanation of the schools core values; a definitive demonstration how the school's curriculum, faculty and placement services meet the prospective students needs; an openness and honesty that fosters trust; and a clear demonstration to donors how their gifts to the school (1) provide a quality education (2) in a distinctively Christian context. Keep in mind that all school recruitment and fund-raising, like politics, is local. There must be a core of recruitment and funding that comes from the community where the school is located. International students are not going to be the answer to student growth and benefactors are not going to be found in distant states. Most people are going to build their legacy through donations to causes they endorse, and this is important, in THEIR communities. By the way - building a significant endowment should have been a priority from the beginning. Why not ask the College of the Ozarks how they have done it for the 106 years without federal student loan programs and where every student attends without tuition and graduates without any education related debt. Might be worth a look --- perhaps there are some lessons to be learned.

When and Why Did You Last Change Your Name?

I have given an lot of thought these past few days to the issue of Christian institutions changing their names in order to present a more generic face to the world. I am now speaking broadly without having any particular institution in mind. However, I do admit that the Houston Baptist University name change proposal is the seed from which my thinking has grown and use it for illustrative purposes.

First I want to answer the question,"Should a Christian institution ever change it's name?" This may surprise some but the answer is "Yes!" There are times and circumstances under which an institutional name change is in order. However, there are far more circumstances that do not justify a name change.

Keep in mind that Proverbs 22:1 tells us that "A good name is more desirable than great riches; to be esteemed is better than silver or gold." The goal in naming our religious institutions is to have a good name. The question then becomes, what is a good name?

First a good name is one that is descriptive of the institution. You would not name a child care center "Green Acres Nursing Home" if it is located in America. It might work in Australia however. Why, clearly in is non-descriptive of your institution. While Oldies and children may have a lot in common you're opening a place to put old people not a place for children. To do so would be disastrous for everyone not to mention misleading and perhaps downright deceptive depending on motives. This is the reason the name change from Houston Baptist College to Houston Baptist University was a good and acceptable name change. The institution had ceased to be just a college and was not a full blown University. Hence HBC became HBU.

Second the name should convey something of its core values. Now when forming an institution careful consideration should be given to the name as to how that name relates to the core values. That name can be a denominational designator, a distinguished person's whose life embodies those core values, or just about anything else one chooses. The institution's given name, just as in the case of individuals, is chosen by those who give birth to the institution. It is an expression of their hopes, dreams and more fundamentally values. As to whether that name proves to be noble or not over time is up to the leadership of the institution (trustee), Administration, Faculty and Alumni. All of these are called upon to insure that the core values are lived out in the life of the institution.

When a denominational designation is included as a part of the institution's name it identifies for the world that the institution is anchored in that particular denomination doctrinal position. That is, it will express the Christian Faith as taught and believed by that particular denomination. Abilene Christian University is not expected to have core values that would be completely acceptable by other denomination. The same is true for East Texas Baptist College; Southern Methodist University: Trevecca Nazarene University; and hundreds more like them.

The birth name is a given . . . it is given by those giving the institution birth. In the case of Houston Baptist University those founding fathers clearly believed that the name they chose adequately reflected the new schools core values and mission statement. Above everything else they wanted it understood that the school was located in the City of Houston and that is was Baptist at its core. This meant that the programs, faculty, and other actions of the University should be consistent with and not detracting to core Baptist doctrine.

Since Houston Baptist University was birthed more than 50 years ago thousands of lives and millions of dollars have been invested building a legacy that gives significance to the name it was given. Once a name has obtained that kind of status there are very few justifiable reasons for changing it.

Marketers and Public Relations experts tell me that name changes means re-branding and are generally the result of having a name that has been tarnished in some way or the particularly entity has changed its core values and/or mission statement so that the name no longer fits. In any case it is virtually always to make a new start by distancing itself from his heritage (past). In the case of non-profits, they add, an institution might change a name to honor someone whose life has made significant contributions to the institution. This is almost universally done posthumously and is rare. I can't think of a single case of such renaming. More often than not they would name a facility of some kind after them and not change the schools name.

In my world, changing a name of and institution that has become inextricably linked to the Core Values of an institution through several generations of use because the name is offensive to potential donors whose theological core differs from that of the institution is on its face wrong. (See previous blog entry). Just because there is a dumbing down of virtually everything in our lives does not justify taking an institution that was Baptist born and Baptist bred and try and pass it off as something other than Baptist. To do so and claim that changing the name does not change the core values is absolutely true. No argument here on that. However, changing the name is the result of changing core values. Why would an Episcopalian give money to a Baptist institution simply because changed its name and not its core values.

It takes money and lots of it to run a University and even takes more money when you cast a vision that is well beyond the resources of the institution financially. It is incumbent upon he who has the vision to share that vision in a way that those of us in the trenches of life can not just share it but embrace it and make it our own. Convince me that where you want the University to go is the place it needs to be. I want to know and trust you. But you have made it difficult since I have never seen the vision nor a plan to obtain it. Don't ask me to pay for something on blind faith. I am neither blind or stupid.

Now I do have an understanding how these things work because over my nearly 50 years of active professional ministry I have sat on all kinds of boards for all kinds of institutions. Far too often these boards while bringing all sorts of experiences, expertise, personalities, and backgrounds together in a single room become myopic while in the room. Trustees hold an institution in trust. It is a trust bestowed upon them by the people who gave birth to the institution. They do not own it no matter how much money they donate, time they invest or service they render. Their job is to see that the institution remain healthy enough in every area of University life so as to perpetuate the Core values and mission of the institution they govern. It is an honor to be so trusted by the owners. (That's the problem with a self-perpetuating board. In their minds they often forget they are holders of a trust and become owners of the institution and beholden only to one another.)

Ever wanted to know what goes on behind the Board Room's closed doors? The short answer, "mostly nothing." Most of what Board members do involves routine oversight of budgets, personal issues, property assessments and policy recommendations all of which comes from the paid staff through the institution's President. It is because their focus is, as it should be, growing the institution in keeping with its core values.

As far as board member interaction I have seen a powerful voice in the public arena mysteriously becomes weak in the presence of people who have not only an air authority but the power of the purse. These Boards are usually dominated by the most driven, forceful, determined daring and competitive member of the board. They do not hesitate to manipulate other members and/or staff to achieve their goals They very often are the people we refer to as having a tendency to "going of half-cocked." They rarely weight the unintended consequences of an action. Just solve the problem at hand now and deal with consequences later. Sort of like "its easier to apologize than to ask permission" idea. The rest will be more reflective but less confrontation and tend to go along with the "real" leader of the Board (may or may not be the chairman) just to avoid conflict.

On a board made up of 20 people your likely to have no more than two or three people like this. These people have neither time nor disposition for details. Great qualities for a leader you say. I agree if they possess a high level of maturity. They keep pushing for action even if the action might prove to be incorrect.

I said this to say that it is my view based on my own experience that this name change business at HBU has been viewed in the vacuum of a board meeting and a decision has already been made to change the name and what that name will be. I am guessing that a strong voice has pushed the idea as the best, easiest and maybe the only way to increase donations to the school from non-member individuals. I doubt any detailed research has gone into the matter. I'm also betting it might even revolve around a few non-Baptist on the board who in my judgement should not have been there in the first place. They were allowed on the board either to get into their pockets or the pockets of their non-baptist associates. Now it not just as seat on the board but the name on the sign and who knows what comes after that.

The "public" town hall meetings are not efforts to solicit opinions but to satisfy the needs to be able to say, "We had them and people got to express their opinions." In reality, they will prove to be information dissemination meetings that serve the purpose of letting you know a decision has been made and will be officially announced shortly. It serves a secondary purpose of allowing the Board to measure the amount, source and intensity of opposition they can expect.

I hear about a fellow (non-Baptist) talking about the present trend to make religious institution generic by removing anything that is offense to people outside the institution, in this case churches, that might keep them from attending church. He started talking about how churches have dropped their denominational identities and replaced them with descriptive phrases. We actually have a church near where we live that advertises that their church does not "feel" like church. I plan on attending one day to see what it does "feel" like. I hope it doesn't feel like a Rotary Club meeting. Anyway, I digress. Then, in the middle of his string of examples he said, "I just had a thought. What is the the one word at the heart of our Christian experience that is most offensive to those non-Christian world?" (dramatic pause)"The most offensive word we Christians have is our Lord's name, 'Jesus.'" Maybe we should change his name because the same argument can be made for making him more acceptable to a world to which we are to stand in stark contrast.