Confessions

As a lover of hip-hop and and one who has been deeply impacted by Christian Rap, especially the efforts of Cross Movement Records (CMR) , this announcement from CMR hits close to the heart.

CMR’s Ambassador Statement

Dear   Body of Christ,

It is with much grief, severe disappointment and an overwhelming fear of the Lord that Cross Movement Records is sad to announce that we will be discontinuing the forwarding and promotion of the Artist and Minister, The Ambassador AKA William “Duce” Branch, due to recent findings of moral failure in his marriage.  It is CMR’s past, current and prayerfully, future position that living in moral compromise is unacceptable and never allowable in the lives of any of the ministers that we co-labor with.   We continue to hold up the teachings of Christ as the standard for all Christians and especially those in Christian leadership and public ministry.  Although it is a rare find these days, discipline is still one of the true marks of the true Church.

That being said, we also know according to Hebrews 12:6 that “whom The Lord loves He disciplines.”  So we know that our beloved brother Duce is under the Lord’s loving care (Hebrews 12:5-11).  We at CMR solicit your prayers for him as he begins the uphill climb of restoration through the process of repentance.  We also ask that you remember his wife and children in your quiet time with our Lord as well.  We are reminded by Galatians 6:1, that we are to work toward the restoration of our dear brother in due season and also to do such in the spirit of meekness, considering ourselves lest we also be tempted.

Lastly, some that have had this circumstance announced to them through other sources have begun to suggest some type of cover-up or a sweeping under the carpet by CMR because of a slight delay in this statement versus the announcement that has already happened in William Branch’s church.  This is the farthest thing from the truth.  This matter was unbeknownst to CMR and upon discovery we have taken the proper time to speak with the Lord, The Ambassador, his church leadership and many other Christian leaders regarding this issue.  After seeking wisdom and allowing the appropriate amount of time to make sure we had all the issues in full consideration, we have come forward as quickly as we were able to after completing this process.

In conclusion, we apologize for the effect that this may have on many who have followed and supported The Ambassador, Cross Movement and Cross Movement Records for many years.  Despite this unfortunate occurrence, CMR and all of its artist/ministers continue committed, our resolve unaffected, with the mission of making the message of the Cross known to the world.  Again, we ask for your prayers as we keep our hands to the plow, heal our wounded and worship the God of our Salvation.  We remain Christ’s and your servant.

Sincerely,

John Wells

Pres/CEO

Cross Movement Records/ Issachar Media

As I mentioned in a comment on The Old Black Church blog. I appreciate the way CMR has dealt with this issue – assuming the Duce was okay making this information public beyond his personal circle. I appreciated CMR’s tactful protection of Duce by framing the issue as “moral failure in his marriage”. CMR did two things that I think properly represent what Christian discipline is supposed to look like.

1 – CMR confronted this issue. It would have been easy for CMR to simply ignore this issue and allow Duce to continue to make music and for his album to be released. Sin is often downgraded in our Christian culture, but CMR decided the act Biblical and call Duce’s transgression what is was and to remove him from a place of authority. I know some may find it wrong that he is being put on “blast”, but we are to call out the sin our of brothers and there is, seemingly, no mal-intent on the part of CMR. Also, I don’t feel that CMR wrote this letter to protect themselves. Their ambiguity seems to be an effort to be honest about the situation without revealing the personal issues that are in play.

2 – CMR is loving Duce.  If CMR is upholding what they wrote in this statement they have realized that God loves sinners and that there is room for redemption and reconciliation not only from Sin, but from our individuals sins. The approach seems to have the intention of helping Duce deal with his sin, growing back into a right marital relationship and growing closer to God.

As with any issue like this, I only now so much, but my prayers are with all impacted.

Especially Duce and his family.

Important question . . . where, then, should we live?

Many Christians are aware of this disconnect between their ethical intention and their daily reality, and seek to care for the strangers and the poor in more programmatic ways. Child sponsorship represents a less direct strategy and volunteering at the local food bank a more direct strategy for dealing with this problem. While I don’t want to dismiss the important work of child sponsorship organizations and food banks, I also don’t think that either strategy alone fully captures the mutual benefit of encountering the poor and the stranger on our own turf and dealing with the ethical dilemma that they represent as part of our everyday life.

For this reason, I believe that choosing to live in a neighbourhood that is mixed in income, mixed in use, and replete with inviting public spaces can be an important fundamental ethical decision. When we can walk from our home to the corner coffee shop or park with the realistic expectation of running into someone who is destitute in one way or another, we place ourselves in the uncomfortable realm of Christian decision making.

Neighbourhoods that maintain a place for the wider community and aspire to be more than “lifestyle enclaves” can be a significant school of discipleship for those who are willing to forgo some of the privacy and homogeneity of contemporary suburban living. I realize that the irony in even raising this question is that many urban neighbourhoods that seem to fit this description have become prohibitively expensive for many would-be residents. However, there continue to be a number of traditional neighbourhoods all across North America that, for one reason or another, have eluded the capricious attention of the real estate market and represent a realistic residential option for any number of Christian disciples. The recent decline of prices in many housing markets may also be bringing urban neighbourhoods back within an acceptable price range for some of us. And from a long-term perspective, I can’t think of any compelling reasons why the Christian community should support the current practice of building new communities that stifle Christian compassion.

How, then, shall we live? It’s an important question that should probably concern us for the rest of our lives. I’m simply suggesting that the answers that we formulate to this question might look very different depending on where, then, we choose to live.

Eric Jacobsen

Co-Working

My friend Kristen tipped me off to an innovated concept called co-working

Seems like a normal, trendy small business right? Well that would be so, but the individuals working “together” are from a variety of occupation and vocations. This area, reminiscent of a coffeehouse, acts as a sort of community working area. There is a board room, offices desks etc.  Co-working essentially provides office space for workers who would otherwise be without a place to work.

As soon as I saw this idea I loved the possibilities.  I can see it being beneficial for adjunct professors, writers, consultants, photographers, artists, small business owners etc.  As a higher education professional, I think I would seek to form a relationship between a co-working space and the adjuncts at my institution.  One of the most frustrating aspects of an adjunct professor’s job is the lack of any office space. Perhaps a combination of shared office space and co-working could ease the stress of their job.

Part of me thinks, “coffeehouses are great places to work, right?”  But it is easy to be distracted by noisy teenagers, cell phone talkers or simply those people with whom you have wonderful conversations. Although there is a joy in the unpredictability of a coffeehouse it doesn’t help individuals finish their work, which is not  pleasing to publishers, editors, clients, deans, and others who have deadlines. This co-working idea, is something in between the chaotic coffeehouse and the sterile office space.

One of the most promising things about this is the potential to renovate older or abandoned buildings. Many of these co-housing networks are in urban space that has not been filled.  But co-working is very flexible, it can be in a suburban strip mall, small town downtown, or  urban center. It gives the opportunity to “re”new instead of” build” new.

Another possible benefit it the cultivation of a creative class within a region, city, community or neighborhood. It has been cited that artists, writers, musicians and such are an impetus towards a vibrant community. Perhaps these spaces will welcome creative people to a community.

I would love to see some of these pop up in Huntington or Fort Wayne. If I had time and/or money I would jump on it. I already have several ideas of where it could happen.  Hopefully someone with money and time finds this idea useful.

Take a listen to this NPR story if you want to hear about a group in NY that decided combine office space

The greatest threat to our planet!!!!

This is a great video which recently won a contest for the Congress for the New Urbanism. If you don’t know what New Urbanism is take a quick look at this video and then venture to wikipedia. I don’t think New Urbanism is perfect, but it is a we need to philosophy be thinking very seriously about because its concepts are pretty good.

Myths

Progressive.org posted a great article called The Myth of the Efficient Car .

We’d desperately like to believe that there is a way to preserve our car-centered civilization, while simultaneously placating the gods of atmospheric warming. Even the president-elect believes it, and Obama made fuel-efficient cars a central part of his energy policy. He promised a $7,000 tax credit to hybrid car buyers, aiming for a million plug-in hybrids, getting 150 mpg, by 2015. He wants to put an additional million completely plug-in vehicles by the same year. And he’s willing to federal funds up for research, or at least he was before we lost all our money.

. . . But there’s an even more profound problem with building more efficient cars. In 1865, English economist William Stanley Jevons discovered an efficiency paradox: the more efficient you make machines, the more energy they use. Why? Because the more efficient they are, the better they are, the cheaper they are and more people buy them, and the more they’ll use them. Now, that’s good for manufacturers and maybe good for consumers, but if the problem is energy consumption or pollution, it’s not good.

. . . Automobiles have become more efficient over the years. Led by the Japanese, carmakers have increased the fuel to weight ration, decreased damaging vibration and vastly increased reliability. In the 1950s, a car that lived to drive 100,000 miles was a rarity; today they routinely last 150,000. The result? Increasing fuel consumption. And not just because more people in the developing world are buying cars, either. People everywhere are buying more of the better, cheaper more efficient cars and – here’s the problem – driving them more. And that was even so when gas peaked there at $8 a gallon in Europe.

. . . There are already attempts at designing a post-car future. City planners have been pushing the “20-minute neighborhood,” where home, work, shopping and recreation are all within a 20 minute walk. Places like Portland, Oregon, are encouraging this kind of development with planning codes and tax breaks. These more compact, walkable neighborhoods would seem to point us in the right direction, but so far they’re extremely limited. Most people prefer car culture. And that includes Europe, and certainly Asia, as well. Unless the various governments enact explicit and enforceable sprawl restrictions, growth will trump any specific increases in efficiencies.

It is very easy for us to get caught up in the efficient car movement and see it as the silver bullet to many of our environmental and economic issues, but as the author points out, what we need to be doing is not lessening our dependence on foreign oil or simply making new fuel efficient cars, but changing and re-organizing our infrastructure.

There is something to be said about the effect of suburban environments which are designed for driving. While some areas are attempting to retrofit many cannot ,without a massive overhaul, change. These are the areas which need to utilize higher fuel-efficient cars . But even so, their are options of public transit that can be implemented in the suburbs and potential re-zoning efforts that will, at least reduce, the car culture.

What we need is a complex transit culture, that has a cornerstone of walking – think about the health and social benefits of walking – mixed with bike travel, mass transit, and yes, efficient cars.  We don’t need silver bullets, we need comprehensive plans.