Forget rabbits, or even Muskrat Love

A guinea pig called Sooty had a night to remember after escaping
from his pen and tunneling into a cage of 24 females.

He romanced each of them in turn and yesterday was the proud
father of 43 offspring.

Staff at Little Friends Farm in Pontypridd, South Wales,
have now secured Sooty’s pen – and begun looking for homes
for the guinea pigs.

His owner, Carol Feehan, said “I’m sure a lot of men will
be looking at Sooty with envy.”

“We knew he had gone missing after wriggling through the
bars of his cage. We looked everywhere but never thought
of checking the pen where we keep 24 females. We did a
head count and found 25 guinea pigs – Sooty was fast asleep
in the corner.

“He was absolutely shattered. We put him back in his pen
and he slept for two days.”

So Sooty’s a guinea pig? I wonder what they were testing on him — an ED drug … or perhaps a new aftershave?

Caption Contest: Write a caption for Sooty’s photo above and post it in the Comments. Examples: “Hey, Pretty Mama, have you lost weight?” or “Child support? What do you mean child support?”

(HT: Samantha Burns)

Tiger Lilly’s open thread

Hi, peeps!

I really don’t have anything to post about, except for my recent birthday, but that’s already been done twice by my Dad and Uncle Ben. Just because the Mall Diva posted approximately 5,000,000 times about her birthday last year, that doesn’t give me an excuse to do the same.

ANYWAY, I propose an open thread (the first ever done by me, so excuse me if it’s not good).

So — Ta-dah! — Tiger Lilly’s First Open Thread: (post a comment below on any subject that you want.)

Ciao for now!

Filings: What sayest thou?

A friend of mine offers this commentary to my recent post about Pastor Mac Hammond, Living Word Christian Center and CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington):

Are you saying the end justifies the means? That because Mac and the church have done good things we should look the other way? That it’s not anyone’s business if they’re lining their pockets by fleecing willing congregants who think every dollar gets them closer to the Kingdom of Heaven? In the Strib article, Hammond says, “It’s impossible to bless someone else or be a blessing if you have nothing to bless them with.” So better to have a jet than a schoolbus. Better to have a Lexus than a 1998 Taurus. Better to have a $500,000 retreat than some housekeeping cabins. It’s like Steve Martin in “The Jerk” . . . this is all I need. These condos in Florida, this Porsche, my kids on the payroll and so on. You seem to shrug and let him off the hook by saying if he is up to no good, he’ll be judged. If he is indeed running some kind of pseudo-religious Ponzi scheme, shouldn’t his actions be exposed to the light of day sooner than later, even if you disagree with the media outlet that’s holding the lantern?

Actually, what I was saying was that the timing and sudden interest the Strib took in Living Word and Mac Hammond’s message (which he has been preaching since 1980, and from the pulpit of his huge building since 1998) was more about the newspaper being offended by his politics than his doctrine, but that may just be a biased assumption on my part. Perhaps I should wait for more evidence than just a circumstantial connection between the stories the newspaper ran, the complaint filed by CREW, and Pastor Hammond’s public endorsement of a candidate much reviled by the Strib’s editorial board and left-leaning watchdog groups.

Perhaps, from my own experience I am too judgmental and suspicious of those watching out for us, of whom author Mark Helprin once wrote, “The dog who protects sheep quickly learns how to direct them, and it becomes a habit. The people have been trained by their watchmen to jump, and to trample what the watchmen want trampled.”* Hence, I can look at the situation and think, “Something smells fishy.”

Similarly, there may be those who will readily assume a pastor or a church is fleecing a “conned”-gregation into thinking it can buy its way into Heaven because the reported facts look suspicious, even if all that has been presented is a careful marshaling of facts and innuendo while the newspaper carefully avoids making any direct accusation of wrong-doing. Why wouldn’t someone reading the story think, regarding the church, that “Something smells fishy?”

So, obviously, there can be differences of opinion based on perspective. I will, however, address the underlying question in the comment above as well as the actual question asked at the end (while also indirectly responding to other comments on the original post).

I don’t claim to be a great Biblical scholar, but I do have more than a passing acquaintance with the so-called “Prosperity Gospel” attributed to Pastor Hammond (also known, less charitably, by critics as “name it and claim it”). I won’t issue a judgment on Hammond because, as I said before, I don’t know what he is actually preaching. I do know, however, from scripture and — most significantly to me — my own experience that material as well as spiritual blessings have overtaken my family and I because we give liberally (admittedly, about the only thing we do “liberally”). We have good incomes, a nice house, nice things, and we tithe off of everything we receive, and give a similar amount in alms and other offerings, and are still able to put aside money for the future. Other people may have bigger incomes, nicer houses, more things, etc. without being givers, but we have seen amazing (some might say miraculous) connections between what we’ve given and the things we’ve received. When we give thanks for our meals we often include 2 Corinthians 9:8, “God is able to give us everything we need to live life in abundance and to give into every good work.” Unlike the world, we’re not just receiving from those who we’ve given to or vice-versa.

Some might say we live too well. We could, I suppose, get by with a smaller home, even older cars and without that new HDTV and home theater system, and give the money to the poor (or pay even higher taxes). Yet in a smaller house we never would have been able to take in the people we’ve taken in over the years, or hold the home church meetings on Friday nights; our vehicles are used to get us and others to places we need to be in order to be a blessing; and I’m going to bring the boys from the Fundamentals in Film class into my basement to watch this week’s movie (ok, that last part may be because I want to see them jump when the artillery hits more than because I want to bless them).

Or we could have kept for ourselves all that we’ve given and, theoretically, have even more stuff. It may be counter-intuitive, but I don’t think so. Proverbs 11:24 says, “One man gives freely, yet gains even more; another withholds unduly, but comes to poverty.” Giving and receiving and giving again is how we live. It’s not the be-all and end-all of our “creed” but it is something we’ve tried to help others to apply in their lives. As Mac Hammond said, “It’s impossible to bless someone else or be a blessing if you have nothing to bless them with.” There are certainly times when warm thoughts, open arms and fervent prayers can be a tremendous blessing, but it’s also valuable to send someone off with a hot meal or a new coat on behalf of our Father who loves us and would not “give us a stone when we ask for bread.”

So, count me among those who think it is an important part of the Christian life to be a cheerful giver (see 2 Corinthians 9:7), and as someone who has seen it bear fruit in my life. Does Mac Hammond have more fruit in his life than me? Apparently. Does he deserve it? That’s between him and God and his congregation, and my opinion doesn’t enter into their relationship and, in fact, could hurt my own relationship with God. I have no idea what percentage of the money that comes in to Living Word goes to Mac Hammond and no interest or say in what he choses to spend it on because there is no accountability between the two of us. It would seem, however, that those who do have a mutual accountability with him are well satisfied with the arrangement.

It is certainly obvious what the church is doing with the bulk of the money. If you go to Living Word’s Outreach page there is an impressive list of ministries and programs to people of all social classes, and all around the world. Missions, schools, a thrift store, a rehab clinic, a Christian night club (where youth can be edified as well as entertained instead of being left to seductions of the culture), and much more, plus a large staff to minister and administer these things as well as to the the people who come into the church itself. There’s always the risk that Hammond and the church love money — or it could be that they love what the money can do.

Of course, newspapers, businesses and governments all love what money can do as well, and they ask for it all the time. Each of us, individually, also has a powerful appreciation for what money can do for us. Cultivating a proper attitude toward money and seeing it as our servant instead of our master is a challenge and stirs up strong emotions and reveals strongholds in our lives. I remember several years ago that a man left our church saying, “All they’re interested in is your money.” A little while later he was found to have been embezzling money from his business. Interesting what he thought he was hearing, isn’t it?

I know that it is common for certain ministries to ask for money by referring to the Parable of the Sower in Matthew 13:8, “some seeds fell on fertile (good) soil and produced a crop that was thirty, sixty, and even a hundred times as much as had been planted.” These ministries will say that they are “good soil” and worth supporting. I typically don’t give to these because Matthew 13:23 says that the “good soil” is our hearts that receive the word, not the ministry that receives the money. Further, if my heart is good, then even if I give to the wrong place I can still reap a benefit well out of proportion to what I’ve sown.

No doubt, as with any church, there are legitimate reasons for people not to like Mac Hammond and Living Word. They may be put off by the large size and prefer something more personal. They may find the teaching too different from what they are accustomed to, or too challenging to their own comfort zone. They may consider it completely heretical. They might turn out to be right, but I can be nonchalant about it and let Mac “off the hook” simply because I’m not the one with the hook in the first place. As Matthew 13:24 goes on to say:

Here is another story Jesus told: “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a farmer who planted good seed in his field. But that night as everyone slept, his enemy came and planted weeds among the wheat. When the crop began to grow and produce grain, the weeds also grew. The farmer’s servants came and told him, `Sir, the field where you planted that good seed is full of weeds!’

“`An enemy has done it!’ the farmer exclaimed. `Shall we pull out the weeds?’ they asked.

“He replied, `No, you’ll hurt the wheat if you do. Let both grow together until the harvest. Then I will tell the harvesters to sort out the weeds and burn them and to put the wheat in the barn.'”

God’s word is the seed and brings the wheat into our lives, though there might be enemies and weeds in and around it. When the time comes, the light from the fire that burns those weeds will overwhelm whatever feeble lantern might be trying to illuminate those weeds — and I’m pretty sure I don’t want to be holding that lantern when it happens.
*From the chapter entitled “The Machine Age” in Winter’s Tale.

I am surrounded

The HDTV guy finally showed up Friday afternoon to hook up the new dish and bring me into the 21st century. I’ve just spent my first weekend with 1080 resolution (whatever that is) and a surround-sound home theater. So, what did I watch?

Golf, mostly. The Nissan Open from Los Angeles was broadcast in HD by CBS, and the experience was amazing and especially heightened my enjoyment of watching Phil Mickelson kack up another tournament. (I don’t know what it is specifically about Mickelson — the smirk, the false sincerity, the ugly logos — but I just can’t stand the guy. No doubt his epic and predictable brain-farts are quite painful to him and I know I shouldn’t take such satisfaction in his travails, but I can’t help it; he’s the Joe Biden of the PGA.)

Anyway, the super-sharp picture resolution showed every dimple on the ball and every blade of grass around the hole as “Lefty” lipped out yet another short putt. It let me see the little flecks of vomit still on Phil’s golf shoes since the U.S. Open. It let me clearly see the bull logo printed on Sergio Garcia’s golf ball (and what is with the horrible commercials trying to establish this mis-shaven Spaniard into a trashy sex symbol? The commercials use double-entendres so heavy-handed pro wrestling wouldn’t even touch them). There’s more to high-def than just the picture, though. Additional sounds are picked up and transmitted from the extra microphones around the course and in the crowd, leading to some pretty interesting effects, especially if you’ve got a home theatre set-up. The sound of a driver crushing a ball is explosive and seems to come from behind you. The applause and cheers of the crowd sound as if you’re standing right in the middle of the gallery.

This isn’t always such a good thing. On one long putt the golfer had no sooner started the putt on its way when some jack-ass, apparently standing right next to a microphone, shouted “IN THE HOLE!” from immediatley behind my left shoulder. I jumped and reflexively lashed out in that direction with a back-handed karate chop, saying “IN THE ADAM’S APPLE!” I wish the clown had actually been standing there. I don’t understand the appeal of this “cheer” except to get yourself “on” TV. Do the jokers who do this stupid thing go to work the next day and brag, saying “Did you hear me on number 14? I shouted ‘YOU DA MAN!’ or “IN THE HOLE!” when Tiger marked his ball.” No one’s ever said that to me at work, and if they did I’d probably say, “Oh, that was you? IN THE ADAM’S APPLE!”

All in all, though, I’m really liking this new technology even if it was kind of expensive, and even though I am discovering some hidden costs. One of the things I watched on the new system yesterday was one of the “Band of Brothers” DVDs. It was the episode where the men are freezing in foxholes around Bastogne. There was a quiet scene where a couple of guys were hunkered down, softly reminiscing about home or some such. I even turned the sound up to follow the conversation, when all of a sudden an artillery shell exploded right behind them (and me).

Now I’ve got to buy a new couch.

The Terrible Twos



There were a lot of things I didn’t know about blogging when I started out two years ago today. I didn’t know how long I could keep it up, what I would write about, what my “voice” would be, if anyone would ever come by to read this and, if so, if they’d ever come back.



Today, I still don’t know how long I’ll keep this up or what I’m going to write about next week. I do know that people come here, and in gradually increasing numbers — but I’m not sure what topic or style explains the attraction. As to my voice, Craig Westover told me at my first trip to Keegan’s that it takes a little while to find it; two years in and most of the time I still feel as if I’m just clearing my throat, careening from topic to topic with apparent (to me) randomness. I read somewhere that if you want to grow your readership you have to find a niche and pound it. I don’t know, sounds kind of boring to me.



Not that I don’t want readers, mind you. I know some bloggers make it a point of fierce pride that they don’t care how many readers they get, or they stopped looking at the Site Meter ages ago. Not me. There’s not much in the way of compensation for running a blog, and the number of daily unique visitors is one of the easiest ways to get a little affirmation in order to keep the juices flowing. I blog mainly to keep the writing gears lubricated and because I’ve come to enjoy the daily hunt for a topic and the puzzle-solving aspect of fashioning a post from an idea that has occurred to me or from an issue that stimulates me. I’ve made it a point of discipline to try to average at least a post a day here and frankly there are days that I wouldn’t even try to rise to the challenge except I hate the thought of someone making a point of coming here and there not being something new to read.



Some days I’ll try to go for a laugh; other days I’ll take a more serious approach (and I hope you can tell the difference). Other days I just stand back and let the Mall Diva or Tiger Lilly do their thing, and they’ve brought their own following, based on the increase in traffic since they started (to boost traffic, add young women — who knew?).



Anyway, I’m going to keep blogging for now, and checking the Site Meter a couple of times a day. Comments and links are even more “affirming” than traffic, but this isn’t the type of blog that seems to attract a lot of either, unless one of the girls is posting. Oh well, at least it’s not holding me back from my daily routine!



I know I see certain locations and ISPs over and over, so I’ll tell you what: if you’re a regular reader but one who has seldom or never commented here, and you want to offer a Blogiversary present, please leave a comment below. It doesn’t have to be fancy or effusive, but let me know you’re out there, and maybe say how you found this blog in the first place and/or what topic or expectation brings you back. Come on, I put hundreds of words a day here, you can at least spare me a dozen! (Ooops, sorry, didn’t mean to sound like MPR in the middle of pledge week there).

Where there’s smoke, find out who’s trying to blow it into your eyes

I’ve had some comments percolating inside me since Sunday regarding the Pastor Mac Hammond story in the StarTribune and the subsequent follow-up articles, but a crises at work (I’m losing a valued employee) and a crisis at home (the illness and departure of our cat) have distracted me from giving this the attention required. Meanwhile, others have also been weighing in (good posts here and here).

My thoughts are the religious angle is but a common and convenient smokescreen to the real issue.

First, let’s deal with the smoke.

You know you’re not supposed to pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel, right? Run afoul of the media’s sensitivities or business interests (especially locally) — say, if you happen to own a piece of land that the city covets for a ball park development and you brazenly hold out for market price — and you can expect to be denounced in boldface type in stories and by communists columnists. If you’re a church that’s guilty of offending the media (I’ll get to that offense in a minute), and don’t fit into the mainstream, reliably liberal denominational mode they’ll try to make you look like Fred Phelps or Jim Bakker, depending on which fits the template or best serves the purpose.

In this case, since Pastor Hammond (interestingly enough, the Strib never refers to him as Pastor, Reverend or any other religious title in its story) of Living Word Christian Center is flamboyant and possesses many material goods that come with a high standard of living and preaches on prosperity then the angle of attack is that Mac Hammond = Jim Bakker, in much the same way that Iraq = Viet Nam, regardless of any fundamental differences there might be. Living Word is described as a “name it and claim it” church, though there’s nothing in the church’s statement of doctrine, or in the list of books written by Hammond’s wife, Lynne that suggests this is the main focus of the ministry.*

While it’s always interesting to see whether the Sunday School drop-outs in the media can out-do their clerical targets in taking scriptures out of context, it is a disingenous argument. First, there is nothing inherently noble about being either rich or poor, even though our society idolizes and gawks at the rich (while supposedly hating them) while merely giving lip service to the poor. In fact, all people are inherently sinful (yes, even the good people) and need to be saved and ministered to. Neither the rich or the poor are saved or condemned by their financial status, but by the state of their hearts, and all will be judged by their fruits.

Everyone is ruled by money, but in different ways, and money is a hard master. Far better to make it a servant, which is part of the so-called “name it and claim it” doctrine. Money is a powerful thing, however, and I’m reminded – not of scripture – but of the poem about the Lady and the Tiger. The snares are there and they are both subtle and profound for those who preach prosperity — just as they are for those who preach the holiness of poverty. Pastor Hammond may take his interpretation to the extreme; if so he’ll be judged – as will those who preach to the opposite extreme.

For what it’s worth, my wife and daughter have committed themselves to spending a year helping a young single mom develop the life-skills she needs to get out of poverty. This includes sharing the same spiritual principles that we’ve used ourselves. While the mother wants and enjoys the material things that have come to her so far as a result of this outreach, she is completely uninterested in the spiritual (at least for now). This doesn’t make her any worse than others we’ve helped or tried to help in the past, perhaps just more honest.

I’m not concerned with media criticism of Pastor Hammond or his ministry. For one, persecution is promised to believers and if he’s sincere in doing God’s work he’ll be fine even if he is not perfect. (For all the wealth he’s supposedly extracted for himself, the church does appear to have done and built some tremendous things.) Second, if he is in error, the consequences are certain and out of the hands of the media and others. It is interesting, though, how money becomes the focus of the media. Apparently the thought that 10,000 people voluntarily go to something they enjoy and give out large chunks of money to do so is suspicious, though I’d say members of Living Word show better judgment than Timberwolves season ticket holders.

As I said at the beginning, the religious criticism is just a smokescreen and a handy club to try and beat Hammond and Living Word into submission. The real issue is politics and power, and in short the media and the government doesn’t like competition in telling people how to think and act and especially what to do with your money. They are the modern day Pharisees and Sadducees, focused on making others conform to man-made interpretations and doctrines that keep them in power while missing the Spirit that inspired those.

The media has no problem with religious leaders getting involved with issues — as long as they’re on the “right” side: AME churches hosting one-sided candidate forums for Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, Buddhist temple fund-raisers for Al Gore, or Cardinal Flynn speaking out on global warming, etc. Use your pulpit otherwise, however, and watch out. My thinking is that this latest “expose” grows out of Living Word hosting Michelle Bachman during the last campaign and Pastor Hammond’s hearty endorsement of her candidacy. Since then they’ve allowed a little time to do some research and find some disgruntled former church members (have you ever known a church — whether of 10 people or 10,000 — that didn’t have disgruntled former members?) and let some legal eagles see if they can find some plausible-sounding charges; whether true or not the charges get attention and serve as supressing fire to get the church or similar communities to duck their heads.

Now, just a few months after the campaign, you’ve got a “watchdog group” in Washington, D.C. filing charges and demanding an investigation into the Living Word’s tax-exempt status. In this case the watchdog is Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). That sounds very noble, but whenever I see a group being called a “watchdog” I always look to see who is holding the leash. With a little poking I think we can find out who the major contributors or founders of CREW are, but their own statements on their website are pretty unabashed as they indicate they were created to fill a niche opposite of conservative watchdog groups such as Judicial Watch, The Rutherford Institute and the National Legal and Policy Center.

Conservative groups such as these have no real parallel in the progressive arena. There are a number of non-partisan groups that address government honesty, including Common Cause, Public Citizen, the Center for Public Integrity, and Democracy 21. While we applaud their efforts, we have noted that these groups focus principally on research and legislation. They do not use litigation to target outrageous conduct, nor do they bring the message of injustice to the people the way their conservative counterparts do. Because these public interest organizations focus mostly on policy issues and not on obstacles faced by ordinary citizens, these groups have not mobilized a shift in public opinion on the issue of government honesty. CREW fills that niche.

This isn’t about religious doctrine, though doctrine can be ginned up to discredit your opponent. Instead it is about free speech, about who gets to speak and who gets shouted down (or sued).

[*Full disclosure: I am not now, and have never been, a member of Mac Hammond’s church, Living Word, nor have I ever met Mac or, to my knowledge, anyone on his pastoral staff. I think I have a good understanding of the doctrines that are said to be taught at Living Word, but I’ve never seen or heard a sermon myself. I have known several people over the years who are, or have been, members and found them to be very grounded and focused on helping others.]

Not so happy Valentine’s Day

Today is Valentines Day, and although I received chocolate, I am not happy. At first your thoughts might be: “Okay, she’s selfish,” but once I give you my reason, you’ll understand.

Our cat was very sick. He had failing kidneys, and today we had to end his suffering. At 9:07 am today, Felix left us. Mall Diva, Reverend Mother, and I were all there, crying our eyes out.

Felix has always been a huge part of our family. Always there, yowling for food, or coming up and hogging your lap, purr motor running at full speed sound. Black fur over one eye, white over the other, it made him look like he had an eye patch.

I know that there is a time when everything must die, but why today? Felix was the best cat anyone could ask for, and the only pet we have with a real name (just ask our guinea pig, Piggy-wiggy; or our parakeet, Birdy-wirdy, or Birdles). If there was a way I could bring him back to full health forever, I would do it.

We all loved Felix, and I will miss him forever.

Ciao for now,
Tiger Lilly

The best meal I ever had

Buffy at Plain Simple English is wondering what special dinner to make for her guy for Valentine’s Day. It sounds as if he doesn’t use the V-Day gifts she’s given him in the past (and they’re nice ones), so I guess the thinking is that if she cooks he’s at least got to eat it. She’s asking the ladies for tips on great meals they’ve put together.

I’m not one of the ladies, which is probably just as well because my most memorable meal isn’t that high on “fancy” or “special.” Here’s how it went, though.

We were living on the East Side of St. Paul, back when the Mall Diva was just the Diva and Tiger Lilly was little more than “‘Ger”. I was taking the bus to and from work, with a three block walk to the bus stop from our house (no, it wasn’t uphill both ways). It was an especially cold and windy day in the middle of a Minnesota winter and the walk home that evening was directly into the pointy teeth of the wind. My office hadn’t gone to “corporate casual” yet so I had on a suit, my professional wool overcoat, a snappy suede fedora and a scarf around my neck and under the lapels of my coat. This is theoretically sufficient for your urban commuter, but hardly what you’d take along for an arctic expedition, which was what my walk felt like it was turning into. The pain only abated a little when my cheeks went numb about a block from the house.

I made it to the back door, lunging directly into the kitchen as if bursting through a snow drift … and was enveloped in the warm cloud of dinner coming off of the stove. Mmmmm, breaded pork cutlets, right out of the skillet with mash potatoes, gravy and (ambrosia!) sauerkraut to spread over the top of the cutlets. The cutlets themselves were perfectly crisped on the outside and succulent on the inside; the mashed potatoes had just the right, satisfying degree of lumpiness, and the bright, shiny faces of my young family around the table were the perfect complement to my own chapped cheeks. There may have been dessert.

When I think about “good eating”, that’s what I remember.