IndianaTwin

Very accurate on the distrust in institutions as a part of this conversation!

Having two Sheets in the lineup is a bit of an abstract expression. Should it be Pollock?

And the thing is, I didn't particularly for Stone in the previous incarnation, but since he's been paired with Benetti, I've started to like him a lot. And the difference is Benetti, who sets up Stone to do what he does best. They have a great camaraderie that suggests they really enjoy being together, and it shows. As opposed to the previous setting, where it appeared Stone didn't enjoy his partner any more than most of us did. And now to do what I said I didn't want to do and name favorites elsewhere I'll also say that, in my opinion, you've got the runners-up nearby, Chief. I don't know how they're perceived locally, but on the few times I get to hear them, I enjoy Steve Berthiaume and Bob Brenley on D'backs games.

Any response that gets me to go back and watch this again is going to get a “like” from me.

The impression I get from this FO is that they are really good at getting close to the end of negotiations and then saying, “Oh, and could you throw in (a PTBNL, an option year on a contract, etc.)” On the prospect side, I’m not sure that we’ve seen it pan out yet, at least in part because these add-ins are usually a little ways away, but it certainly has on the contract side. To that end, I’m intrigued and impressed. I wonder, too, if having his pedigree included in the announcement of the original trade would have softened the resistance to the trade. Probably not, because this is the Internet, but I wonder.

Between being too cheap to purchase a package (compounded by the reality that I’m in a horrible black-out area — wouldn’t be able to get White Sox, Detroit and several other games), I see very little of Bremer. But you’ve captured one of the vastly under-rated aspects of good PBP people. I don’t want to turn this into a “what we like/don’t like about other announcers” thread, but if you haven’t had opportunity to watch Jason Benetti of the AL Central team several hundred miles to the southeast but that shall remain nameless, know that he is particularly outstanding in that regard. It pains me to compliment anything about this particular franchise, but Benetti is really, really good, probably the announcer I most enjoy listening to these days. After the pain of the previous regime on that network (who shall also remain nameless), it is actually a joy to watch games Benetti and Steve Stone do (and I’ll do it this weekend). They have a camaraderie I have rarely seen elsewhere.

I appreciate what you’re saying — a “formational” approach to faith very similar to what others have named/implied.

Very valid critique of the church, Sconnie, and a perspective that I don’t think is limited to being held by youth. (Unless I get to count myself, a 56-year-old, as a “youth.”?)

You can join Dantal and me as well, Nate! (As can anyone else. ?)

I’ve held off in responding, in part because I was one who posted the original article. My sense is that we’re very much coming at this from the same perspective. Part of the challenge when I see articles like this is that we all have different understandings of what it means to “be relevant” and to “change.” If by “relevant,” we’re talking about the ability to walk alongside people (and society) in their deepest pain, you’re right — being “relevant” doesn’t “change.” At its core, loving God and loving neighbor don’t change. Yet “relevant” does “change” in other ways. Some of that is the recognition that our deepest pains (as individuals and in our society) do change, In some aspects of the faith, we can also gain different understandings of scripture over time. In my tradition, for example, there is a different understanding of the place of women in leadership compared to decades ago. When I was a child, the inability of women to use their gifts in certain areas of ministry brought pain, for example, both to them and to those who appreciated their gifts. Amidst a broader society that was reshaping gender roles, that’s a “change” that brough “relevance” to some. I recognize as well that not all strands of the faith are at the same point on this particular topic, but there are other examples I could name from my tradition, ranging from some that feel quite significant to other examples that feel pretty insignificant now, but at one point in time, were quite significant to those involved in the conversations. Perhaps there are examples of those in your tradition as well. But you’ve captured the challenge in identifying the tendency to define “relevant” as the need to “adapt to what our members want.” In a denominational magazine a few years ago, a pastor wrote to the effect of “Find a church that you don’t like, and stay.” His premise was that our tendency to go “church shopping” for the church with the hippest this and coolest that turns us into “consumers” of church rather than being committed to our local worshipping community. Another friend compared “church shopping” to that of a buffet, reminding me that in the line at Pizza Ranch/Ponderosa/China Buffet, our tendency is to take more of the stuff we don’t need and less of the stuff that we do need. I’m not suggesting that it should be our goal to take part in the church that makes us the most miserable. And you’re exactly right in that it’s our task as a church to talk about the “why” in why we do what we do, shaping people in faith along the way, whether that shaping is in how we worship on Sunday (or other day) or how we live out our faith seven days a week. Unfortunately, in the world of the sound bite and bumper sticker, we often feel we don’t have the time for that shaping, and we compare ourselves to the church down the street with flasheier programming and watch it get bigger and bigger while ours gets smaller and smaller. And yet, there’s an element of truth in that we as a church probably do need to “change” in some ways to become more “relevant.” I confess that I cringe when the church in town has a drawing for a motorcycle on Father’s Day to try attracting men. I don’t think I could do that as a pastor. But I also have to confess that this church is indeed ministering to the men who end up coming as a result. From the field I work with (financial stewardship), I lament no longer passing the offering plate. I miss feeling the tangible act of worship in putting my offering in the basket each week. I worry about how we will model generosity to our children, recognizing that I learned to give by watching the weekly model of my parents. But I also know that my congregation received 47 percent of its giving electronically last year, plus more that came in through Qualified Charitable Distributions or Donor Advised Fund gifts. How we “do” the offering needed to change to become relevant to people’s giving patterns. I gotta stop now. I think it’s wrestling with some of these questions has also contributed to the tiredness many of us in ministry are feeling. (I’ve also named in other settings that brevity is not one of my spiritual gifts, so I need to stop for that reason as well!) I think it would be great enjoyable to pick up this conversation as we watch a game together sometime, Dantal!

When thinking about the offense in the preseason, I wasn't expecting the bottom third of the order to have a combined batting average of .377 this late in the season. You do add them up, right?

You're underestimating me. I'm pretty sure I've shared way more than one truly terrible opinion. ?

Don't know if the number of pastor posters is disproportionate to the number of pastors in the general population. If it is, perhaps it's because being a Twins fan sometimes often requires being willing to spend a significant amount of time in prayer! ?

Cherokee Nation, as is Jon Gray, according to this article: https://www.mlb.com/news/rockies-jon-gray-proud-of-cherokee-roots-c197631590

Pretty much the story at the beginning of most three-game series, no?

Falvey? ?

Good call. I'm no longer coaching her, but she's still a very legit runner. And it's a wrap at 3:29:42. I'm not sure how many times she's finished Boston, but it's a bunch.

Gotta love the Boston Marathon tracking system. One of my former athletes is in her final mile, hitting the mile-to-go mark in 3:21:38 in her last year in the 45-49 age bracket. Let's bring her in, folks.

I'm late to the party since I was chairing the Zoom calls this morning. But I really appreciate when people use the word "plethora." It means a lot.

Yes.

Can't see it -- 66 pitches.

Okay, Twins, let's get a few runs. I've got one pizza with barbecue pulled chicken and one with chicken bacon ranch headed to the oven that I'd like to show off with a win, and I'm not sure there's going to be leftovers if I wait until tomorrow.

I found it a thought-provoking article on a number of levels. For context, as I mentioned, I'm an ordained minister. I no longer serve in congregational ministry, but serve as a denominational consultant in one particular area of ministry, where I relate to several hundred congregations, primarily through their pastors. The article barely mentions COVID, but my sense from conversations with these pastors is that many of them are struggling. Already facing the challenge of how to be "relevant" in a highly polarized world, in the last couple of years pastors have needed to face that challenge in a new context that they felt woefully ill-prepared to navigate. The cultural/political/social polarity they were working amidst was compounded by strong polarities on if, how, and when to worship in a gathered fashion amidst COVID, when worshipping in a gathered fashion is seen as a central premise of the faith they are seeking to promote. I spoke with a congregational leader this week who spoke articulately about how the nature of worship in his denominational tradition, which places a particularly high value on "community," is dramatically different when worshiping via Zoom compared to worshiping in a gathered space. Additionally, while the church has always sought to be "relevant" to the issues of the day, whether in the time of the early church, the Reformation, or any significant movement, the reality is that the church's central narrative is a story that's 2000 years old and its central writings are more than 1900 years old. (Note: I'm referencing the tradition Johnson is a part of, which is also the one I'm part of -- I can't speak to other faith traditions.) Added to that, my experience with pastors is that we are often a group that values tradition -- we're committed to that centuries-old story told through centuries-old writings, after all. Unfortunately, those of us who value tradition in this way (and I count myself among them) often don't have the "agility" Sconnie references among our primary skill sets as leaders. And, we're leading in an institution (the church) not known for its agility. A greater ability to be agile is probably a primary reason that the churches which ARE growing tend to be non-denominational churches.

Lettuce celebrate the win, nonetheless.

Nah, looks like they went with No. 42.