Skinny pants preaching

A topic I have been toying with for a couple of months or more.  Coming up with a title has been difficult – preaching the gospel in skinny jeans, or something like that.
Went to a church in NC that kind of finished my crossing into a contemporary service for worship.  Well, with a little help of other churches we have attended or visited over the past few years.  But this was one church that I noticed that everyone involved, it seemed, was wearing skinny jeans.  As I told the bride, it looks like I am out of their league unless I can find a way to get my fat butt in a pair of those size 28s.
The preaching was spot on biblical, unlike one particular preacher man in Texas who probably has seen one but is clueless… another post.  And since the church in NC is on Roku I do watch some of the archives just because I can.  But I do think about the days I was preaching and being questioned from what color tie I would be wearing to if I had one to begin with.  Somewhere in Hesitations there is scripture that says the preacher wears a tie that does not clash with the missionary’s president’s dress.  Once I had my jacket off and one of the older members came in and made me put it on as I was on sacred ground.  It which I wanted to state that God told Moses to take off his sandals because he was on sacred ground, but no use arguing with tradition.
We have had a lot of preachers that were more showmen than pastors with a purpose.  Big hair, tailored suits, spiffy shoes with some foreign leather uppers, pearlys that could reflect the sun back into the atmosphere, and…  to guys in t-shirts and skinny jeans with a gruffy scrub on the face.  Oh boy, could you imagine Buddy L?  If you were in Abilene at the “First Church” you knew Buddy.
Seen some guys that made it to the big time only to fall and the fall was great.  Look back on some of the ministries that have come and gone.  Those that people sent a lot of money to in hopes God would bless them with the riches of the world.  Some of the guys got too big in the head.  Others, well they pass and the succession failed.  The reason was that too many people were involved because of the man and Godly goals were secondary.
I talked to two different people that had been to the Crystal Cathedral back in the days.  One guy had been there when Robert started in the drive-in theater.  So two different perspectives that had some similar results.  The visitor mentioned that on the list of travels was to visit the Crystal Cathedral at least once.  While at the morning service the person behind asked if they were visitors and yes they were.  The individual told them that the morning service was all show for the dough but if they really wanted to hear some good ol’ gospel preaching come back in the evening.  They did and that is where Schuler came out with the Bible and the Holy Ghost.  The regular attender had told me the same thing.  Interesting.
Has it changed?
“Plastic fruit Christianity” is an interesting term. Maybe like the plastic greenery on the platform? Uhm.  Of course the author of the blog uses the phrase “the adjustable Jesus” as how so many consider how their God should be as should their Jesus, created in our image.  Some posts I read seems to indicate just that as if in the 4th chapter of Hesitations it specifically states such.
We like the convenient, the comfortable, the Burger King have it your way Christianity.
Walsh unpacks and breaks it down.  Well worth the read.
http://themattwalshblog.com/2015/12/17/church-makes-christianity-cool-comfortable-find-new-church/

The Coffee Scene in Denver

http://www.5280.com/eatanddrink/magazine/2015/11/beginners-guide-denvers-exploding-craft-coffee-scene

Pet Peeves of Safety

Pet Peeves of Safety

“The {you name the person or position} failed” statement always drove me nuts.  Did they really fail?  Why did they fail?  Was there an analysis or assessment to indicate where the failure was or is that an assumption? 

For some projects I found applying the tools of the HFACS, SHELL, Swiss Cheese Model, FTA, PHA and other system safety associated really unpacked where a lot of “failures” occurred. When we do not model out the event effectively we might miss the real root cause or failure.  Yes, the MORT or that make believe model TAC had created problems but there were other methods. 

 Teaching grad level human factors engineering and leading some seminars on the subject I found that we are quick to assume before a factual assessment.  Learned that early on when one unmentioned boss “invited” me into the world of aviation or flight safety and became involved in a crash where it was assumed one thing but after hearing out some people going back and finding out something tertiary involving design of an ejection seat. 

Had a commander call me on the carpet over the repeated statement that “the supervisor failed” and asked me what did the unit do right.  It was a report that went out months late and without my review.  So a lot of tap dancing occurred.  But the commander was correct, what did they do right and if there were failures, the corrective actions were insignificant to what could fix a problem if there were one. 

An example I use in my classes is when we had a rash of backing incidents with the SPs.  In a drivers remediation course we started talking about why they were there.  Backing, all 11 were there for backing.  “Driver failed to recognize a hazard” was the safety investigation.  Whoa, we do not need to go over hand placement on the steering wheel or watch crashes the Ohio State Patrol put out.  The issue was backing and at night.  What was the problem?  Did anyone do a preliminary hazard analysis when the AF decided to paint every boundary pole in the WSA chocolate brown?  From Yellow with black markings now we had poles that were brown nose brown. 

The lack of backup lights on the APCs in the dark with non-reflective brown posts were at fault.  Once we covered the poles with reflective beads the backing incidents went to zero. 

Another pet peeve – lack of significant and supportable citations.  I was reminded of this when a student responded to an exam question with a general comment versus the required citation and justification. Had a tech that liked to throw around the general duty clause.  It was easier he said to me one time.  No, specifics, drill down, unpack the standard, and provide sound justification.  You have to provide whoever you are trying to explain the issue or hazard to with specifics.

I receive a call from a company that needs some help.  They hired someone to come in and provide a written assessment of the company’s overall safety.  The individual was, I am going to assume, former Air Force safety.  The reason I believe that was when the manager was explaining to me the checklist the consultant left, it was from AFOSH 127-series.  Time for a visit and a laugh.  Holy schamoly, this was a copy of a copy of an AFOSH checklist that had been whited out, crossed out, and some items overlooked.  This “consultant” was lazy.  None of the references were cross checked with OSHA.  So there were no adequate citations and no way for this company to rectify safety issues. 

The company had already blew their budget so for a cup of coffee and a tour of the place I provided them with tools that they would have to work through.  Two states have some great draft safety programs.  They downloaded the documents, changed some wording and they had a safety program.  Uhm, had a student this term ask something similar and offered up my secret.

Another issue is that safety people do not sell themselves adequately.  Sometimes our hands are tied because of budget or some other reason but we do a poor job showing a good cost benefit analysis to the bean counters.  Not saying it always works. But at least management would have that info.

Ok, another peeve, and this might hit some colleagues hard.  I have an issue with the “certification” requirements.  Boy, do I have some stories to tell but just a couple.  The first one was a student that called me up and asked for some help.  He worked for a company that decided they needed to hire someone with a CSP, certified safety professional.  The reason was that some of their competitors had CSPs and that could be an issue if going out for a contract.  The person they hired had the letters.  The problem came when there was a safety concern and OSHA was going to make a visit.  While Management was taking a walking tour to discuss safety issues the CSP was coming up with some WA statements that were contradictory of 29CFR.  The student would state that IAW 1910 and subsequent citation give what OSHA mandated.  The manager would ask the CSP for clarification to which the answer was, “whatever he is reading from is just a guideline” and that she never saw that before.  My student bordering on a career limiting move stated with his copy of the text in hand would explain what was necessary. 

This “qualified and certified” person never handled the standard before and was clueless.  There was an assumption that because this individual passed the exam they were also knowledgeable of what safety was about.  The manager asked if the student could provide the CSP a copy of the standard.  The student also took some of my hints for program outlines and provided those as well. 

Another was when director of the OSH program I would routinely receive calls from companies asking for interns or potential employees knowledgeable in safety.  On this one particular day a guy calls me and one of the first questions was if any were CSPs.  I explained that no as they would need to graduate and take the perquisite ASP exam.  He tells me that he would never hire another CSP again.  He went on to explain that the 3 he hired and fired were clueless of boots on the ground safety and always explained how underpaid they were for having a certification. 

Like I stated, I have some stories.

I have found that people do not want to be unsafe.  They do not wake up thinking what they could do unsafe.  What I have found is that we either do not provide the tools that create that safe zone or we slip into what I call “risk creep”.  I learning this from an attendee we had in one of the seminars I was teaching of international students.  The individual was an ex-pat that was living in Australia working the oil fields in UAE.  He spoke of and drew out what he had defined as risk creep. 

We do our job safe and do it quite well. But there is that time where we push the line.  Maybe because of mission or need and we find we can do the job this way without consequence.  We keep bumping up against the line and creeping further out until that mishap or event.