For those of you who think that the emerging church is but a passing fad, think again. The recent issue of Books & Culture has turned it's ever so cultured and educated ear to one prominent voice in the emerging church movement. Books & Culture is a highbrow evangelical publication on books and culture (duh), plus critiques on media and ideas of the day...
The aforementioned voice is none other than Andrew Jones, aka Tall Skinny Kiwi. The article is called: "What Did You Go Out to See?," and it is the FIRST response to The Christian Vision Project's question: "As Western Christians adjust to their minority status in Christianity...What must we learn, and unlearn, to be agents of God's mission to the world?"
Good stuff, TSK! Too bad the article is unavailable online. I even have a subscription to the entire CT Library, and I still can't find it online. . .
Please pray for Josh Buck, a pastor at an emerging Wesleyan church plant in Eastown, Michigan (near Grand Rapids). Josh and I worked together at a summer church camp during college. He and his wife recently lost an infant daughter in a tragic accident; and just last week, while vacationing in Mexico, Josh had a swimming accident, nearly drowned, and is now paralyzed. It's too soon to know the extent of the damage to his body. In addition to their infant daughter now with Jesus, Josh and his wife have two kids, with another on the way.
You can read updates on Josh' progress at his church's site, Greenhouse.
The church has created a poster to get the word out and ask for prayer. You can find the poster HERE.
Pray for strength, healing, and peace for the Buck family...
The point of the article is to explore who Jesus truly was, is, and will forever be, without all of the baggage heaped on by the church. This would, in fact, makes Jesus very strange to the church. I'm pretty sure the inverse is true as well. I think Jesus sees many present day churches as very strange....very strange indeed.
Anyone with a TV has now experienced the horror that is Office Depot's new ad campaign. That creepy hand just shoots out of a little white box, directing happy-go-lucky shoppers find solutions to all their office supply needs.
It's weird, and it doesn't make me want to shop at Office Depot. If I strolled into an Office Depot store and a hand popped out of a box and started pointing in one direction, I'm pretty sure I'd run the in the other.
The sad part about the whole campaign is that it's a blatant attempt to counter Office Depot's main rival, Staples. I'm no advertising expert, but the Staples Easy Button concept seems like a winner. It's simple, memorable, clever, and ties in with the motto of the company: "that was easy." Albeit ridiculous, it makes me wish I had an easy button.
Bonus: it doesn't send chills down my spine. I don't want a disembodied hand, even if it points me to a pile of cash.
The bottom line is that Office Depot took a shortcut with their advertising. Instead of creating something that flows naturally from their vision, they ripped off the Easy Button and creepified it. Instead of coming up with something clever of their own, they tried to copy the clever of another company, and it turned out all wrong.
Parallels abound in the Christian subculture in America.
People like Coldplay? Then let's find a band that sounds exactly like Coldplay, but injects Christian words and themes throughout their lyrics. Doesn't matter if they are unable to match the musical ability, creativity, and vocals of Coldplay. They remind people of Coldplay, and they sing about Christian stuff.
People like brand name t-shirts? Then let's slightly change the wording of the t-shirt to have a Christian theme.
You get the idea. The point is simple: to a world watching what we do, how we present ourselves, and how we function and communicate, Christians tend to come across more like a Disembodied Hand than they do an Easy Button. We've shortchanged the church by bypassing the difficult, yet so necessary creative/inventive/innovate process and instead we've chosen to rip off popular culture. With one hand we wag our finger, condemning popular culture for it's debauchery. With the other, we pick its pocket. And the result is a disembodied hand that looks downright strange to a culture we're trying to impact.
We assume so often that it's the only Christian way. We'll ingest Christian music as if its the eleventh commandment, without question of its quality, not to mention it's theology. And it doesn't stop at the mass media level. It trickles down into the local church. Congregations are so used to consuming the Christian imitations of popular culture, why not use the same principle in our ministry work? Need some outreach training? Take your pick of the multitude of resources offerred by any American gigachurch. Need a Sunday School teacher? Never fear, I have a set of DVD's by the well known superpastor that we all love. Or, how about sermons? Need a little extra to pack some punch in your delivery? Then just download one from the host of websites promising to 'assist' and 'equip' pastors in their ministry. (Aside: Dustin Bagby has a telling article on this practice, and I'll link to it as soon as he can find a website/publication with enough guts to post it.)
Again, at nearly every level of Christian engagement in the world, from one-on-one spiritual formation, to small group study, to Sunday morning worship, to mass media communication, Christians have a choice. They can take the shortcut and choose cheap imitations that are void of authentic creativity and ingenuity. They can accept a Christianized version of popular culture. Or they can choose the narrow road of creativity, authenticity, and contextualization. This doesn't mean that we should stop sharing resources or good ideas. The global church should learn from each other. But instead of artificially copying what others do, let's contextualize what's helpful. Let's adapt to our own context. And let's unleash creativity and ingenuity from the grass-roots level.
I realize that this would require turning the entire establishment of Christian media upside down. Rather than purchasing the music, the books, the movies, and the resources of a select few, let's focus all that money into creating spaces for Christians in the local context to create and innovate in ways that are effective and authentic within that local context.
Unlike the Easy Button, this won't be easy. But it will be fresh, exciting, and closer to the creative nature of God. And we could do it without any creepy hands...
(My buddy Trevor has also blogged on the Staples vs. Office Depot ads HERE)
I moved around some links here on the site. Most of my online profile content (Web 2.0 stuff) is now in the 'profile' page (link above), and I've posted most of the blogs I read regularly in the right sidebar of this page. So many of you link to me, and I should be a good blogging friend and reciprocate. If I've left you off the list, and you'd like to be on it, please let me know. Or if I butchered your link, please bring that to my attention.
The Spiritual Art of Food Buying: Organic vs. Local?
22 January 2007
Bekah and I have been evaluating our food purchasing. It's but one aspect of pursuing lives that promote justice, good health, and environmental stewardship. We believe that buying with a conscience is an important aspect of following Christ. As we've read up on food issues, we've learned a few things:
Organic is typically healthier. Less artificial chemicals, more natural.
Organic is often (not always) less productive. One of the benefits of those synthetic fertilizers is that they can produce more food with less ground. So there are some trade-offs.
Organic, especially outside of California and especially in the Midwest (where we reside), usually does not mean local. So all the 'green points' we would earn for buying organic would immediately be canceled out by the transportation impact. Our sheik organic food is so often smothered in oil, which has significant environmental and political implications.
Additionally, organic doesn't necessarily mean 'just'. A company can commit to using organic principles/methods and still oppress their workers. This is why you often see two stamps on a pound of coffee: 'fair trade' and 'organic'. They are independent, unfortunately.
In a perfect world, we could purchase fair trade, organic, LOCAL foods, at a decent price. But it's not possible in NW Ohio. So while it may be healthier and trendier to go organic, we've had to weigh the costs/benefits. NW Ohio simply isn't a region that can produce very many organic fruits and vegetables, and the culture doesn't promote or demand organic meat. In order for our family to go 100% organic, we have two not-very-good options:
We could drive 15 minutes to Wal-Mart, since they are purchasing more organic foods. Again, the environmental impact and the issue of justice to workers factors this out. Plus I have a hard time convincing myself that a head of organic lettuce placed next to my motor oil and shampoo in my shopping cart is a good thing.
Or we could drive 50 minutes to Toledo to a fancy-pants grocer. While the issue of fairness to workers (compared to WalMart) might be removed, the environmental impact is even increased by the commute. Plus, the cost is prohibitive. And our old economy car wouldn't exactly fit in with the other vehicles in the parking lot.
So we've opted to purchase locally first, pursuing fair trade and organic if possible (we buy organic/fair trade coffee and tea, since those are always imported anyway). We have a local meat locker that is a small family owned operation, processing from only local farms. Our meat can be sourced, and we are supporting local business and farmers, and not global conglomerates.
We also have just found a tiny local grocer run by a Dunkard Brethren family. It's a one room shop that provides healthy, local, and inexpensive, cheeses, milk, bread, eggs, and other items. Some are organic. Many are not. But there is an emphasis on healthy, natural, local foods.
Beyond this, we're stuck with big chain grocers, and we try to steer clear of the processed, meal-in-a-box type of purchases. How do we choose from the big chains? We try to choose based on how they treat their workers. Beyond that, it's mere convenience.
It's not ideal, but we think it's a step in the right direction. Any other suggestions for our food buying? Any factors that we are forgetting?
Scot McKnight has a great little article on Christianity Today's website. This is a must read on the emerging church. It exposes the urban legends and engages in 5 distinctive streams that pool themselves in the lake of 'emerging'. It's thoughtful and balanced (unlike most writings on the emerging church). Check it out HERE.
"He (Josiah) did what was right in the eyes of the LORD and walked in the ways of his father David, not turning aside to the right or to the left." 2 Chronicles 34:2
New Media, Convergence, and Postmodern Church, Part II
16 January 2007
I've been thinking more about this convergence theory and its implications for postmodern expressions of Christianity. It seems that right now new media is converging, but has yet to fully 'converge'. I'm not sure when one could say that something has fully converged, but regardless of where we find ourselves on the journey to convergence, the process of convergence seems pretty messy. As new media converges in my own life, I find that the inverse happens in terms of my attention. For instance: I currently have one eye on this blog post, another on my email inbox, all the while listening to a podcast, and my cell phone could ring any minute. Given that these various forms of communication have yet to fully streamline and converge into one seamless form of media, my attention struggles in a battle over which form of media to devote itself to. It's a buffet of media plurality that has yet to work itself out.
Is it possible that the emerging church could also suffer from a similar spiritual A.D.D.? Are we offerring so many 'new' forms of spiritual engagement that we are fostering scattered and partial devotion? I hope not, but I sense the danger here. I'm all for new forms and expressions of authentic spirituality flowing from Scripture, but I sometimes sense we are throwing a bunch of things to the wall, hoping something sticks. This is not a call for spiritual simplism, but rather a caution to not go overboard in our alternative worship styles and methods. There is a beauty in pursuing simplicity (very different from simplism) as it nurtures single, focused devotion on what's truly important.
Additional postmodern implications abound. A plurality of faiths that has dominated the previous few decades is now giving way to a mish-mash of spiritual convergence. What once was inconceivable is now becoming more and more the norm (e.g., I once met a Buddhist/Wiccan/Catholic...no joke). The philosophical difficulties of spiritual convergence are for another day, but the reality of individuals pursuing a converging spirituality are worth noting, and pose a unique and new challenge for the postmodern church. Syncretism and contextualization must now face a new day in mission to new converging light.
New Media, Convergence, and Postmodern Church. . .
15 January 2007
So you've probably heard about the iPhone, Apple's new go-go gadget handheld that combines cell phone, iPod, and Blackberry features into one product. It's introduction is sending shock waves through the media and tech world, as techies gawk and drool incessantly.
The iPhone is but one example of a communication theory that is well on its way to become communications law: convergence. Convergence is the theory that all media is converging into one mass medium; a one-stop communication shop where a user will access and participate in new communication technologies. The lines between print, television, and online media are blurring quickly, as evidenced by Steve Jobs' nifty lil' promotion of the iPhone.
Convergence is a postmodern concept, as it is essentially an effort to transfer media autonomy from the media mogul to the individual user. Traditional mass communication is giving way to a YouTube, Facebook, and Blogging culture that doesn't want to be merely fed information. This culture wants to interact with it.
It causes one to pause and think: What impact does convergence theory have on postmodern expressions of faith and spirituality? We are already seeing signs of blurring between sacred and secular spaces in our spirituality. Faith communities are gathering intentionally in very public places, such as pubs, coffee houses, and theaters. Spiritual formation is happening at theology pubs over beer and conversation, and the Christian subculture of music and publishing is being challenged.
Additionally, the way spirituality is transferred is changing rapidly. No longer is spiritual formation reduced to individual 'quiet times', weekly bible studies, and Sunday morning worship (though these are still central elements). Christian leaders are harnessing new communication technologies to provide spiritual nourishment, whether it be through group theology discussions over the web, collaborative blogging, or podcasting sermons. One can now access spiritual formation in a myriad of ways.
One can find many benefits to such spiritual convergence. I can listen to a sermon on my iPod while working out at the gym. I can participate in a weblog discussion on an issue facing the church at present. I can worship through singing in the car.
But with such reward comes a significant risk: The technological convergence can replace authentic relationships. Given that I can access my spiritual nourishment via the internet and my iPod, one can easily let such technologies replace face to face encounters of spiritual significance. Churches are even establishing 'internet campuses' (for example), allowing an individual to experience all levels of spiritual nourishment and worship via the web. The spiritual art of hospitality could be reduced to a past practice of the church. As our tech relationships converge, our personal relationships may very well dissolve.
Therein lies the tension of convergence and the postmodern church. Does this mean that the church must forsake technological advancement for the sake of community? Of course not...technology can play a helpful role in community formation, so long as it doesn't become community formation.
(I condensed my sermon for this Sunday into a short little piece on adoption. Relevant Magazinepublished it on their website. Below is the first paragraph.)
Romelia’s head was spinning. She couldn’t believe it. I’m only 15. How can this be happening to me? Coming from a poor, rural region of Guatemala, she had little hope that she would be able to raise the child now growing within her womb. Her family’s poverty has caused her to drop out of school years ago, to enter the workforce and contribute yet another meager wage to survive with her family....
(p.s. I should say that much of the thought regarding James 1:27 came from Mariam Kamell's great lil' paper, "The Emergent Need for James". For some reason the footnote didn't make it into the article. Sorry, Mariam...)
I've been noticing a list making it's way all over the web: The Church Report's 50 Most Influential Christians in America. Why? Why are we drawn to rankings like this? C'mon! Let's take a step back and look at how ridiculous this is: WE ARE RANKING PASTORS. Does anyone else see a problem with this?
Thus, in response. Here's my own list. Enjoy the top 10 things that are stupid about a list ranking pastors:
10. It simply bolsters the superpastor image, one that needs to be shattered and tossed. As we've seen in recent events, power and influence so often corrupts, and turning pastors into gigachurch celebrities, with all the branding of the next best toothpaste smacks of superficiality. 9. It's a reader chosen list, which is dumb (not that readers or dumb, nor that that collective wisdom is faulty). However, there's a difference between influence and popularity. This was a popularity contest, a grown-up version of choosing prom king/queen. Or American Idol. Same diff. 8. It's saturated with health and wealth gospel pastors. If this doesn't reveal that the church in American needs some serious work, I don't know what does. 7. It reminds me of another famous list: Forbes' Billionaires. Looking at trends, the rich are getting richer, and the superpastors are getting super-er (or something like that). 6. How do you respond if you're on the list?: "Oh, man. . . I slipped to 12th this year. I'm losing influence. How'd that guy get ahead of me? My book sold more copies! Next year I'll be on top. . . Look out Joel! I'm gunnin' for ya!" 5. Why not have a pastor playoff? Wouldn't that be more fair? It could be comprehensive, comparing number of books sold, speaking gigs, size of congregation, and how many people download your sermon every week via iTunes. American Christians can then have a Christian version of the March Madness college basketball bracket. Official brackets could be sold at a Christian bookstore near you. What? Does this seem ridiculous? EXACTLY. 4. Only 5 on the list are women? Excuse me? Glass ceiling? 3. Only 6 are minorities (from what I can gather). . . again...this speaks for itself. 2. 3 on the list are Christian television executives. That stuff on Christian TV is influence? Uh oh. 1. I wonder how Jesus reacts to such a list. How does a man who 'made himself nothing' view a ranking list? How does a humble carpenter from Nazareth rank? Where would a guy like Jesus, who never wrote a book, never started any official 501c3 ministries, never owned a house...rank? Jesus certainly wasn't popular, nor did he have a mega-gogue (a big ol' synagogue). He was a homeless, itinerant rabbi, with a small following and a big message for the world. He formed a community, and through his community, his message, his good news, and his influence spread.
Just curious...I'm not ripping on most of the individuals who made the 'cut'. I'm simply attacking the notion that our Christian sub-culture loves junk like this (along with mints with verses on them, and t-shirts that rip off name brand logos). I'm not attacking the incredible things God has done through some on this list. It's the idea of the list, how it's formed, and what implications it has that trouble me.
I'm preaching this Sunday in both of our church services (8:30 and 11). The title of my sermon, as of now, is "God's Broken Heart." It'll be on adoption, centering on James 1:27. I'm looking forward to it, though preaching on Sunday morning still feels somewhat rigid to me. There's no room for dialogue or interaction...just me on stage and 'them' listening. I don't think I'll ever be comfortable in that setting, but it's tolerable 4-5 times a year, especially if it's an issue that I'm passionate about, such as adoption. "Become all things to all people," right?
If you live in or near NW Ohio, consider yourself invited (contact me for directions). Or, if you're looking for someone to speak to a group about adoption, contact me and I'd be happy to do whatever I can to oblige.
"Let my heart be broken with the things that break the heart of God..." Bob Pierce
This weekend, Bekah and I were privileged to host a family in our denomination that is preparing to head to the Middle East as tentmakers.
While they were here, we hosted a VOX Film Night and watched the film Paradise Now. It's a gripping film on the lives of Palestinian suicide bombers. Having spent a semester abroad in the middle east in college, I was particularly interested (and passionate) about this subject. I left my 3 months in Israel/Palestine more frustrated and confused than when I initially came (my initial thoughts/views were quickly destroyed when confronted with real life), and this film doesn't attempt to solve the problem, merely shed a more complete light on the plight of Palestinians. A few things of note in the film:
The media and prevailing assumption of the West (especially in the evangelical church) is that suicide bombers choose this route as a vengeful, spiteful, and somewhat lustful FIRST resort of dealing with the Israeli/Palestinian issue. While the film doesn't shy away from the heroism that is fostered among suicide bombers in Palestinian culture, it makes a compelling case that this method of suicide bombing is but a desperate last resort. "If one cannot be equal in life, then at least one can be equal in death..."; this is buts one rationale offered. (This is not a justification of suicide bombings, but rather an attempt at understanding. Big difference...)
Along the same line, the film does a powerful job of showing the everyday reality that leads many young men (and a few women) to choose suicide bombing as a means to not only further the resistance, but also as a means of escaping the hell that is life in present day Palestine. It's difficult to watch a human being resort to such desperate measures.
The film also is careful to note that not all Palestinians are extremists. Many are conflicted, oppressed, yet hopeful proponents of peace and justice. Thus, the Palestinian people are vastly more complex than the media (and the church in the West) gives them credit for.
The entire issue is incredibly more complex than we realize. There are deep, deep cultural/ethnic/religious issues at play, issues that mere diplomacy won't fix. Western political pragmatism and strong arming won't cut it. Carrots and sticks by the U.N. won't do it either. Until the world immerses itself in the middle eastern culture (honor/shame, prominence of land, community over the individual, etc.) and 'contextualizes' a plan for peace, our attempts to 'help' will only breed more suffering.
Finally, a parting shot: maybe if we owned up to the reality that both the Palestinians and Israelis have made some crucial mistakes, and both have legitimate gripes, we could then provide a platform to make some progress. But this involves leveling the playing field, which is a far cry from present-day reality, as evidenced by our own nation's blank checks and blind eyes to Israel's campaigns against the Palestinians. Again, this doesn't at all make suicide bombings a good or right thing, but understanding leads to healing...
(Update: I now have verifiable proof. I just received the following email from Ziki. In it, it reads: "Congratulations! Now when someone is looking for you on Internet, a link to your Ziki will be displayed on top of the search engine results :
I've stumbled upon another possible way to enhance your web presence. It's a new Web 2.0, social networking startup called Ziki. Ziki functions similarly to Facebook and MySpace in that it networks and publishes content, building online community. However, they network with a slightly different purpose in mind: online presence enhancement. Within a few minutes, you can have a Ziki profile set up that imports your blog, gathers all (yes, all) of your online profiles (Amazon, Blogger, Last.fm, etc.) into one place, and aggregates your videos, photos, and other online content. Plus, they promise free ratings boosting/sponsored links in the web's top search engines to the first 10,000 people who sign up (info HERE).
Will Ziki survive the battle for online social networking? Only time will tell, but it looks promising.
I've been researching the internet for some helpful Mennonite links to try to gauge what's 'emerging' in Anabaptism in the West. If found some under-appreciated gems that you should know about:
1. Check out my del.icio.us links on the topic HERE. 2. You can check out a list of famous Mennonites HERE (#1 on the list is J.C. Chasez of N'Sync. I'm hoping that the list is in no particular order...Please don't let it be in any particular order of importance!) 3. The Mennonite Central Committee, the relief and development arm of North American churches has a great website. They publish a great little 6x/year publication, A Common Place, which highlights their work, promoting peace and justice. You can subscribe to the mag for FREE HERE. 4. I also found a Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online HERE. Great online resource, especially for leaders, historical issues, etc. (Related: Were my ancestors mennonites? Quite possibly, as evidenced HERE.) 5. The Third Way Cafe has an abundance of online resources on mennonite/anabaptist distinctives. 6. Finally, of course, the Mennonite entry in Wikipedia. Why will these links, and others to come, important to an emerging/missional discussion? Because, mark my words, you all will soon see a resurgence in anabaptism. The radical discipleship, emphasis on community, justice, and peace all resonate with a postmodern world. In researching for a paper on Newbigin that I'm working on, I came across this fantastic bit of wisdom:
Prominent missiologist David Bosch, as noted by Michael Goheen, saw a link between Newbigin’s thought and Anabaptist resurgence: The Anabaptist tradition “has been gaining tremendous ground in the North American context especially among those who, following Newbigin, are calling for a missionary encounter with Western culture.”[1]
Huh.
[1] Goheen, Micahel, “The Missional Calling of Believers in the World: Lesslie Newbigin’s Contribution,” in A Scandalous Prophet: The Way of Mission After Newbigin (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 37.
It's the beginning of a New Year, and everyone is listing, listing, listing. . . So I'll throw my two cents in. In 2006, I was introduced to a relatively new, but exploding Web 2.0 phenom: Facebook.
Facebook is a social networking sight, and I'm pretty sure every human being under the age of 25 is on it (plus some who are slightly older than 25, such as yours truly). It's an interesting place, and I thought I'd give my top 10 reasons I love/loathe Facebook. We'll start with the bad news first:
Top 10 Reasons I Loathe Facebook:
10. It's a time killer. Seriously, you can waste a hour no problem. 9. Profile Pictures--This isn't a blanket comment on all profile pics, just some.
To some of the women: what do you accomplish by dressing like that? Seriously, you're begging for internet stalkers to track you down...
To some of the men: Seriously, a drink in one hand and an inaccurate gang sign with the other doesn't make you look cool...just stupid. Plus, nobody holds their chin up that high and purses their lips. Ever seen Jamie Kennedy in Malibu's Most Wanted? I rest my case...
8. Some of the Photo Albums: Ok, here's where I really rant. A very typical Facebook album of teens/young adults consists of highlighting how 'wicked sweet' last night's party was. Lots of group shots, with certain essential elements: a. bloodshot eyes, b. tongues hanging out, I guess in a provocative fashion, c. faces smashed together, and d. really cheap, bad tasting beer. C'mon people! 7. People who update their status every waking minute. Nobody's that interested... 6. The 'how do you know this person' question? Facebook Friends can detail their relationship. A few fixed categories doesn't really cover the complexity of friends and family does it? 5.The religious and political views section on the profile. Again, very limiting... 4. The fact that I often post something on someone's wall, not knowing that my wife is signed in to her facebook account (or the opposite). Yeah, that's led to some interesting encounters. My wife once posted on a young adult female's profile while unknowingly logged into my account: "Hey girl, hope you're having a great day! Let's do coffee..." And I've posted similar stuff on guys' walls using her account. Awkward... 3. The Advertisers Are Taking Over. Slowly but surely... 2. Have I mentioned the party photo albums? 1.It's like an addictive drug...therefore I loathe it.
Top 10 Reasons I Love Facebook:
10. It's not mySpace--mySpace might possibly be the most annoying thing on the face of the earth, full of spam, errors, bad, bad profile songs, and Tom. If you don't know Tom, don't worry, you're not missing anything. Facebook doesn't have any of this Tom Foolery...(pun intended) 9. Networking--It's simply an ingenious way to network and communicate with friends. 8. Ministry--I can message everyone involved with VOX, create an event that people can RSVP to, get driving directions...you name it. 7. Long lost friends reconnected--I've reconnected with high school classmates, ol' college buddies, and people I thought I'd never be in touch with ever again. 6. Birthday Reminders--I'm horrible with dates, and Facebook ensures that I'll never forget someone's birthday ever again. 5. Groups--People created outlandish and ridiculous groups on Facebook, which is completely pointless, but completely fun. 4. Did I mention that it's not mySpace? 3. News Feed-Apparently the news feed was a pretty controversial addition to the site, but I think it's great. It's an easy way to stay updated on what's happening within your networks. 2. It's Web 2.0--Cool... 1. It's like an addictive drug...and therefore I love it.
The views on drewmoser.com are solely my opinions. They are not necessarily the official views of any organization with which I'm affiliated (VOX Ohio, AEMC, Nieu Communities, etc.). There. I've covered my rear.
