Retail Holidays and a Story of Stuff, Revised and Expanded

Although it may have begun as an undercover Christian catechism (Snopes say no), the 12 Days of Christmas came to paint a picture of gift-giving excess that has entertained (or maddened) many generations.

Today, though 12 days of holiday shopping seems like nothing.

A few years ago I wrote about America's New Commercial Holidays, the proliferation of special shopping days that took off around 2012 and expanded as far as what one source dubbed the 16 days of holiday retail.

I like "Balance Your Checkbook Sunday," though it could use a new name, too, since few of us write checks to any degree anymore. Balance Your... Spreadsheet?

I haven't heard references to Grey Thursday or Sofa Sunday lately. Instead, retailers seem to be focusing on Black Friday and stretching the oh-so-limiting idea of a day having just 24 hours. (After all, as St. Peter tells us, with the Lord a day is like a thousand years?) I saw my first ad urging Black Friday shopping in late October. Better get started!

Lest you think America unique in excessively commercializing holidays, consider China. November 11 was dubbed "Singles Day" in 2009 (you know.. 11/11, single digits). It's became not only that nation's "premier national shopping festival," but the largest online shopping event in the history of the world. This year, in one day (an old fashioned 24 hours this time), sources say the people spent upwards of US$38 billion dollars (with some disturbing results for the environment).

That's a lot of spending.

In the spirit of an old fashioned Christmas, may I point out: You still can't take it with you.

*          *          *

In my 2014 post on this topic, I mentioned that Chris and I were making plans to divest ourselves of a lot of stuff, leave some in storage, and move across country (though maybe just for a year) with what we could fit in our two cars. Though Christmas was drawing nigh, we hoped friends and relations would be cautious about giving us more stuff in the months before we were to leave.

We're still on the East Coast. With the turns our careers have taken, we think we'll be here for some years. Now it's time to go back and get the 50 boxes (including all my books!) from the in-laws' attic along with the bit of furniture they've held onto for us. Summer would be better than winter, I know, but we have more freedom now and plan to spend the days between Christmas and New Year's (and a bit more) driving a small moving truck cross-country. (Shipping our stuff would have cost considerably more.) I'm trying to look at our long drive from Eugene to LA, then across I-40 as a potential adventure, but it's a little daunting.

It has been nice to have a relatively uncluttered apartment, although we have certainly acquired more stuff since our 2015 move. Interested to see how we manage with 50 boxes more.

How Do Churches Decide Which Missionaries to Support?

Which way is the wind blowing?

One of my big projects this week has been crunching the data from a survey I helped my mission agency design and conduct. The survey was sent to mission leaders in about 3000 churches that support field workers sent out through our agency. We were not trying to understand the American church at a whole, just trying to do a better job understanding the churches that partner with our agency in some way. We wanted to know what the global outreach in these churches really looks like, how they make decisions, what is important to them, what they want from mission agencies, and yes, what they think of us. 

We received 331 completed responses as well as another 50 or so partial responses. Since the survey was conducted over email and went out over a weekend - in the deadest month of the summer - I am actually surprised we got such a high rate. I think this data could be very helpful.   

My research consultant says we would need at least 500 responses to draw the strong correlations between the different bits of data that we were hoping for. But what we got is kind of a windsock, he said. After a second I realized he meant that they would show us which way the wind was blowing. Fair enough. I watched the data as it was coming in, and later responses largely echoed the initial ones. I think if we had twice as much data it would stack up along the same lines. Our data is good, as far as it goes, but it's not enough for statistically reliable correlations.

I have virtually no experience in this kind of data analysis, so I don't want to draw conclusions too quickly. I'm learning. If you are interested I can share the final report when it is done. Here's a glimpse, though. One of the questions we asked was about how churches decide which missionaries to support. I thought it might interest those of you who raise your own support. On average, each of these churches supported 24 missionary families/couples/individuals (though many supported fewer than ten and several supported more than 100).

What selection filters do you prefer or require for missionaries you support?

10 = Always …………….……………………………………… 1 = Never

	10	9	8	7	6	5	4	3	2	1
Raised up from within our church	70	50	63	37	21	32	2	11	8	19
Connected to someone in our church	48	42	50	28	27	27	4	30	18	30
From within our tradition or denomination	24	26	38	37	34	36	14	17	24	53
From other churches in our community	4	7	8	25	34	41	25	44	35	76
Aligned with our strategic focus or values	144	70	45	11	17	12	2	7	4	10

I was not surprised at the high number of churches that placed a high value on supporting home-grown missionaries. Many churches are only really interested in supporting those they consider "their own people." This came up in an informal interview I had with a long-time leader in our agency while I was deciding what to put on the survey. I asked him if he'd noticed any big changes in how and where new workers are raising financial support. He told me it used to be common for a missionary to have 10-15 supporting churches, but now most did not have more than 2-3. 

Looking at this from the point of view of the person trying to raise their support, it might be a little discouraging. If being - or having been - an active member of a church is a requirement for support, trying to raise support from churches that "don't know you" is a pretty tough sell. If you grew up in one church and your parents are still there, and your spouse is from another church, and after college you were worship leader or youth pastor at a third, and then you moved to another city and became part of a church there - well, you might have a lot of church support. Otherwise, maybe not. Better to look to individuals. And maybe some of those individuals will help you foster a relationship with their churches... a relationship strong enough to get you the "connected to someone at our church" points.

I'm sorry if this all sounds a little greedy. I'm just trying to sort it out. And I do wear several hats: mission committee member, mission mobilizer, mission supporter, and support-raising missionary. So I've felt the tensions.

I was a little surprised to see community and denominational ties ranked so low on this survey. For the support-raiser, maybe that suggests that while referrals may be a good way to raise support from individuals they are not so useful when it comes to contacting churches. But that may reflect the culture of our agency's conservative-leaning support base. Many are independent Bible churches and my guess is that they are a bit hesitant to link arms with other churches. Since that's not really the sea I swim in, I'm not sure. I suspect my Presby pals would be more likely to see nearby churches as allies than competitors. Sure is nice for the missionary if they can have multiple supporting churches in the same community. But maybe that's not happening so much these days.

Of course the stand-out number in this dataset is the priority given to supporting mission efforts and missionaries who are aligned with the church's strategic focus or values. Really? Do that many churches have a strategic focus or articulated values? The church I'm part of has had trouble setting any kind of strategic focus. Feels too much like favoritism. We treat our support commitments more like marriage (a matter of loyalty) rather than business (a matter of strategy). Our support decisions say to our ministry partners, "Where you go, we'll go with you." We hate to say no, except to strangers; we hate to drop people, once we have a real relationship with them. 

But maybe other church mission leaders think more critically. To me, this result suggests that someone raising support would do well to look for support and other connections within churches that already show a high commitment to the kind of work they are doing. I mean, you could be your church's first, only, and most beloved missionary, but if that church falls apart or loses interest, you'll want to have some allies elsewhere. You may be able to find them among people who really dig (and support) your kind of ministry already.

There were some things we didn't ask, and maybe couldn't. Do you think mission committees and other gatekeepers really make decisions about money based on something else, like where you're going to be serving, the size of your family or budget, how cute your kids are, or if you can tell stories that make them laugh and cry?

Random Acts of Tax-Deductible Charitable Giving

Do you want to add another $.45 to go to the Salvation Army?" she asked. I didn't. I also walked by the bell ringer at the next place. I shy away from retail charity of all kinds, preferring to give deliberately, generously, and in focused ways - not carelessly and in little bits to whomever has the cutest or easiest fund-raising campaign.

But maybe I need to get off my high horse about this. I also showed up for my church's Thanksgiving service without the requisite bag of cans for the food bank. After all, I didn't have any little children to enlist in preparing this good deed, and my $50 check would go further and might bring in some healthier offerings, right? Of course, I forgot the checkbook, so my good intentions didn't go so far as the family carefully picking out canned green beans at Costco, did they?

Others must find it harder to say no to such easy, hands-on, feel-good requests, because I'm seeing more and more of them. I wonder what percentage of charitable giving comes through such random acts of charity? Do you participate in much of this kind of stuff? Why or why not? Do you budget for it? How do you decide what organizations to support, or do you give to all who ask?

Recently I've noticed several friends raising support asking for "just 50 partners at  $10 a month..." That's more than a one-time donation of $.45, true. But it's a hard way to pay the rent. Would you rather do that, and support many different things, or partner in a more significant, costly way?

Blog Topic Stew

BLOG TRAFFIC:

For the last week or so visits to this blog have been up 40% due to traffic generated by “Google images.” So far I have not been able to determine what has caused this change, or what image(s) the browsers are finding. When people come to my site through a search engine, Google Analytics usually tells me what they’d typed in. But these visits do not show up on that part of the report. Hmmm.

TRIVIAL PURSUIT:

You’ve noticed, I’m sure, how much easier it is to find information in recent years. The world of “did you know the real story behind…” is now open to all. And what’s more, everybody seems to know this. You wonder something, you find it in a matter of seconds.

Combine this with social networking and I wonder how much our formerly somewhat mysterious lives and minds are becoming an open book. For example, you may have noticed the ‘25 random things about me’ thing that is going around Facebook and perhaps elsewhere too. You’re supposed to share 25 random bits of information about yourself, then “tag” 25 people to do the same. Wondering how viral this thing could become I am toying with the idea of not answering until I get tagged 25 times.

After all, 25 random things is a lot. What would I have left for “two truths and a lie,” “I’ve never,” and other such party games? In spite of my openness on this blog, I’m reluctant to participate. Ah well, there’s always the limitations of the human mind: who will remember which startling fact belongs to which of their “friends”?

MONEY:

I sat down this weekend to pull together all my financial records, to see how I did in 2008 and get ready for taxes. I’m not doing my own taxes this year, now that I have a housemate who is a tax preparer (go Deb!) But it means I have to get organized before I go in for my appointment. Plus, it’s a good time to set financial goals for 2009.

I met my 2008 goals for saving and investment (though with the markets being as they are my net worth is pathetic). Housing expenses were right on budget. But charitable giving? Ah, I’m not as generous as I thought I was. The “everything else” quadrant – basically the money I spend on myself – was nearly double what it should have been – so, too much of the money I meant to give to others got spent on me. Hmm. Time to get more serious about the budget, I think.

PHONE:

Am enjoying life without a cell phone, though I know my friends will not allow me to continue long in this state. They probably think of me traveling without one as being as dangerous as driving without a seat belt. The cell phone company was remarkably cooperative on suspending my service, as long as I wasn’t actually requesting money back. And they will also keep that money and the number available for 60 days if I want to get a new phone. Furthermore, they are happy to sell me a new one for as low as $10, actually free with the purchase of a certain number of minutes.

I think I’ll give myself another week to enjoy this respite from one aspect of the rat race before taking them up on that offer.

SOUP:

I took a step last week in conquering my fear of soup. “What!” you say, “She’s afraid of soup? This girl is even stranger that we thought!” It’s not exactly soup I fear, just the making of it. Too many images of Mom cooking down a turkey carcass I guess. In my mind, I knew there had to be easier ways to make soup, but was timid about trying them out. So I pulled out a cookbook my stepmother gave me, called something like “Cheap Fast Good,” and many, many of the dishes are soups. So I thought I couldn’t go wrong with recipes from a cookbook with a title like that. I picked out a nice beef-and-vegetable soup recipe to try first.

The only thing is, we didn’t have a good five-quart soup pot. We do have one big enough but the bottom is too thin and that affects its performance. So, my first “cheap” soup recipe was $30 more expensive than it might have been, since it included the purchase of a proper soup vessel.

The results, though, were delicious. This week, I’ll try something with chicken.

(This picture isn’t my soup, in case you are wondering. I borrowed it from a cooking website, 'the gutsy gourmet.' Which is perhaps the sort of activity that’s messing up my blog traffic statistics.)

Living on Giving, an Insider's Perspective

I may have to swallow my words about not suffering with the economic downturn. Looks like my support may have taken a hit, after all. The regular monthly donors are all still with me. But it's those December 31 checks that make up the difference. Last year's December giving made up more than a third of my income for that year. Unless there are more checks in the mail or waiting at HQ for processing, December 2008's meager donations will total 6% of what came in for 2008 - less, even, than my budget for the month of December.

That would put me a few thou "low" for the year, and my cushion completely depleted. In January I'll likely start going into the red, costing the organization money. I won't know for sure for another week. Maybe someone sent a $5000 check. Maybe I'll start the year ahead, as usual. I wait somewhat anxiously to see.

"Annual income, twenty pounds, annual expenditure, nineteen nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery. The blossom is blighted, the leaf is withered, the God of day goes down upon the dreary scene, and - in short, you are forever floored. As I am!" (Mr. Micawber, in Charles Dickens' David Copperfield)

Well, I'm hardly headed to the poor house, like Mr. Micawber, and even if I were it would not necessarily mean "result: misery"!

And there's more than a thin silver lining in my case. I haven't been "able" to raise support for years, simply because my income has been equal to or higher than my (pretty modest) approved budget. Monthly pledges hover between 80 and 90%, but income has been greater. So when folks ask me how they can help, in good conscious I have felt I had to send them away. It would have been smart to make a list of those who asked, now that I may need them!

Maybe now I can diversify my support base, not keep leaning on the 2 churches and 20 or so families who have done so much for me these last 14 years (yes, October 2009 is my 15-year-anniversary of taking this job!) Many of them are retiring now and may not be able to keep giving at their current levels, much less increase.

I've been thinking about this recently, as I've become aware of how many people in our church in Colorado give personally to support those who are on the list of "ministry partners." All of them (us) get something from the church's budget but many of them are also well-supported by individuals and families in the church. Not me. Not a one.

So, I'm feeling a bit overlooked. Which is silly, of course, because as I mentioned before when people ask me about my needs I tell 'em to put their checkbooks away! So, I need to get my heart right about this. Make sure I don't walk around with some air of entitlement or self-pity, not compare myself to others who are paid much more for doing their jobs.

There are other benefits that are far greater than my salary - like the opportunity to do what I love, to serve so many people, and yes, to change the world because of how I spend my time. Not to mention the chance to travel the the world, influence thousands, and experience wonderful relationships with people all over the globe because of what I do. Surely I am well compensated. And honestly, the opportunity to live "on support" is one of the things I would count as compensation - the partnership of sharing in the gospel, you know? I love that.

If I do start looking for financial partners among the people I worship with every week - with little clue what their finances, attitudes toward giving, or current commitments may be - I will need to spend a lot of time in prayer. Must make sure my attitude is pure and sincere, since my speech will reflect it, and that I am diligent to see the relationships don't suffer under any strain the "ask" may make on them.

Scarcity and the Scarcity of Scarcity

This blog is one place I store my half-baked ideas. (But for you, they would be less baked than that!) But here are some things that have been stirring in my mind lately.

Scarcity

Unless my financial supporters all drop me, I have a hunch I’ll be one who comes out of this economic downturn relatively unscathed. Prices are lower, and that helps. Sure my retirement investments are looking pretty pathetic, but I should not be touching them for another 25+ years. I don’t own any real estate (for better or for worse). I have no debts. I have a decent car and health insurance (though that $1000 deductible makes it seem meaningless). And, the kind of job I have and the way it’s funded leave me not really vulnerable to downsizing and cutbacks. I’m not going to get rich – I never though I would – but I’m not in trouble, either.

I know many are worried or suffering and probably with very good reason.

But how many of you are in the same position that I am: aware that trouble is brewing, but no worse off than you were before, nor likely to be?

It may be because of my circumstances as much as anything, but I’m seeing the silver lining here. Am rather glad that saving and cutting back are more in vogue than conspicuous consumption is. This just seems so much a swing in the right direction. This “correction” may stir up compassion and creativity and be a small blow against the culture of greed and entitlement. (You see, I’m secretly a socialist. Well, part libertarian and part socialist.)

The Scarcity of Scarcity

On the other hand, we have a long way to go before we’ll have any idea what it’s like to really do without. I came across a rare and used book shop recently and felt the thrill of discovery – what treasures it held! But my pleasure was dampened by the realization that these things are not as meaningful as once they were.

The advice I used to give people researching cultures or ministry opportunities seems more appropriate than ever, “imagine what might exist and try to find it.” I don’t even have to say that anymore: everyone knows it.

So, I knew that lovely set of _________ books might be just as easy to get on eBay or someplace else.

Finding or collecting anything seems so much easier than it used to be. Money is still an issue, but you can find anything you want, even if you can’t have it all. And this somehow makes it all feel less special or fun. I am not so sure I like the ease and equalizing effect of the internet. Nothing is unknown or inaccessible; too many of life's mysteries are fathomable, at least in a sense, with the mere click of a mouse. It's kind of a letdown.

And while there have always been people who were hard to shop for because whatever they wanted or needed, they would get for themselves, this trend also seems more widespread than ever. We don’t need anything; we can get what we want easily enough.

Some Thoughts from Chesterton

"Our whole civilization is indeed very like the Titanic; alike in its power and its impotence, it security and its insecurity. Technically considered, the sufficiency of the precautions are a matter for technical inquiry. But psychologically considered, there can be no doubt that such vast elaboration and system induce a frame of mind which is inefficient rather than efficient. Quite apart from the question of whether anyone was to blame, the big outstanding fact remains: that there was no sort of sane proportion between the provision for luxury and levity, and the extent of the provision for need and desperation. The scheme did far too much for prosperity and far too little for distress – just like the modern State. "

Source: G.K. Chesterton, "The Great Shipwreck as Analogy," in The Illustrated London News, May 11, 1912

Frank Laubach on What to Do When the Money's Gone

Missions work, like so many things, can cost a lot of money, but what can you do when you are out of funds? 

*  *   *

Frank Laubach was a missionary to the Philippines starting in 1915. In the beginning it was slow going; he was mostly frustrated and unsuccessful with the harsh Muslim people he was targeting. Honestly, he did not like them. But God broke through and melted his heart toward them, and one of the changes which came after that point was a renewed focus on learning their language.

In doing so he discovered that many of the Moros could not read. As a result, they were victimized by and powerless in the hands of surrounding communities. Laubach wanted to do something for them. Using his own language-learning flash cards as a basis, he started teaching, developed a dictionary, and soon even started circulating a newspaper in the people’s language. This raised the status of their language and equipped them to better connect with and compete in the outside world. He had hit on a need.

Before long Laubach was being constantly sought by Moros to teach them to read. He started hiring assistants from among the Moros as the demand grew and grew. He set up a language and literacy program, and trained his staff to be reading teachers.

At that point, though, something terrible happened back home. Yes, it was the Great Depression. With that, his funding dried up. There was nothing to do but fire his staff and close down the program; he couldn’t afford to keep it going. Or so he thought.

He called a meeting to tell everybody the bad news.

Here’s what Laubach writes about that day in his journal:

“Kakai Dagalangit, a tall chieftain with fierce black eyes, stood up. He has 13 wives and all he has to do is look at them and they behave. He looked at me with those fierce eyes and said, ‘This campaign shall not stop. It’s our only hope.’

‘Then he looked at those teachers with his fierce eyes and said, ‘I’ll make everybody who knows how to read teach somebody else, or I’ll kill him.’

“Everybody taught. Nobody died. Everybody liked it. I did not like the motto ‘teach or die’ and so changed it to ‘Each One Teach One.’” *

What seemed to be a tragedy was a blessing in disguise. Using simple, reproducible methods that didn’t rely on money from back home made all the difference. Many more learned how to read than would have the other way. Many were able to learn in a matter of hours, and they could immediately pass on the skill to others.

The one-on-one teaching style had other advantages. It was great for building trust and sharing the gospel, too. Laubach’s methods have been used around the world to bring the blessing of literacy to millions—60 million, to date—equipping oppressed people to stand up for themselves and take care of their families and brightening the future of whole communities.

* Sorry, couldn’t find my original notes to identify the source of this exact quote, but looking online I see the story also told and with more detail in Majorie Medary’s book, Each One Teach One—Frank Laubach, Friend to Millions.

Monet, Money, and the Snobbery Within

Caption: Monet, "Bathers at La Grenouillère," 1869

I saw this painting at the National Gallery in London... and liked it so much I bought a postcard of it that is among the images on the wall of my bedroom.

Still, strangely enough, I felt a dash of scorn when I saw a print hanging in a hotel room in which I stayed recently. "I've seen the real thing!" I thought. Yeah, and I didn't spring for the poster - I got a postcard!

Who's to say the person who picked out the hotel "art" had not been to London, as well? Or, does it matter? Isn't art for everybody?

It's likely I would never have been most of the places I have been if I had a different kind of job. It's because the ministry account (generously endowed by my supporters) pays for plane tickets that I make it to Europe, Asia, Africa. So why do I feel superior to those who have seen less of the world? There's no room for boasting, is there?

I've also found a good bit of scorn and snobbery in my heart lately toward those who live beyond their means. So much of the news coverage about this credit crisis - and especially the soundbites coming from our political candidates - makes it sound like "ordinary Americans" have a "right" to spend money they do not have, and that it's a real hardship to have this taken away. (A friend wrote about this here.)

I turn up my nose: with no mortgage, school debt, or car payments - with good health (and, in spite of my griping about its expense and inadequacy, health insurance as well) : no, this does not affect me, at least not directly. I've never had much trouble living within my means.

The fact that my IRAs are worth less and less all the time, even though I keep putting money in them, may in fact be connected to the state of the economy... but as my practical mother points out, buying shares when things are going down - assuming they later go up - means you get more for your money. I find this some consolation!

I am as susceptible to foolishness as anybody, so why should I look down on those who find themselves overextended, financially?

How easy it is to find our priorities and perspective askew. Today I'm meditating on Jesus' sermon on the mount. He says...

Matthew 6:24-34 (New International Version)

24"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.

Do Not Worry

25"Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? 26Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life^[a]?

28"And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. 29Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 30If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? 31So do not worry, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' 32For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

Health Care vs. Health Insurance

I hope the debate about how to see that more people in the US have access to affordable health care acknowledges the difference between affordable health insurance and affordable health care. I don't know about yours, but my insurance works more or less like the mafia.

When I first began life as a grownup I bought a 'catastrophic'-type health insurance policy. You pay a little bit of money every month and don't get much for it, but if you're really in trouble, they do the heavy lifting. Then for years I was on an HMO - we paid quite a bit, but that covered almost everything; we just made small co-payments for services and prescriptions.

I'm just learning how things work with a PPO system, and the one we have does not impress me. The company rep who came to explain it to us and even the guys in our HR dept in HQ like to talk about all the stuff it covers. I have submitted a couple of claims and wondered how long it would take for my reimbursements to come back.

But silly me, I didn't realize it's really just the same as that catastrophic policy I had long ago. You make your payments, and then you ALSO pay for your own health care on top of that - unless you have some huge catastrophe or long-drawn-out illness, in which case they start picking up expenses. It's unlikely I will ever top the $1000/year deductible. Which means the question of what procedures or percentages the policy "covers" are moot.

Only now, what I used to pay for a year of my catastrophic policy is the same as the cost of just one month of this one.

OK, my company pays, technically, it's true: this is a "benefit." But since we all raise our own financial support - including salaries, benefits, travel, retirement, and employer- and employee-side taxes - one feels these things a bit more keenly. At times, over the years, I've found it helpful to think: wow, this is a big expense, but my supporters, they're so generous, they want me to have this. It is hard to maintain that attitude when it becomes clear that I don't have anything. The insurance companies are the ones enjoying my "benefit."

My mother - a very sensible woman - reminds me that it is far better NOT to get one's money's worth when it comes to insurance. True. I'm glad to be healthy.