Change continues: no Lent service tonight

We're sitting on April 1 and as I flip the calendar, I see "Lent" as a reminder. No in-person attendance of course. My church often has a soup supper beforehand. One never knows if it'll be a full meal or just soup! What a small potatoes issue or question now. My, the tiny things we tend to complain about in good, normal times.
There will be no going to church tonight. Or, this Sunday. Churches are scrambling to get services on the Internet with reasonably good quality. Quality has been spotty in the past. We're reminded of the transition caused by our online world in so many ways. You see, if online is to be tapped for Sunday enrichment, it needn't be through the service as posted by my local physical church. That might fill the bill just fine. But one might check out an endless array of Sunday spiritual enrichment.
Know of a former favorite pastor who now plies in some other place? Well, it's child's play to look up that pastor's Sunday presentation. For example, I knew Pastor Lauren Hauger when she was in Morris. Her last name was Snell when she first came here. She and a retired dentist have now found happiness in Park Rapids. The dentist handled me twice when I was in an emergency situation - I'll never forget. Had I not gotten in quickly, I would have had to go to the medical clinic for pain relief. Dr. Jeffrey Hauger was a godsend.
I recently got caught up on my dentistry following a three-year hiatus, and such wonderful timing because I doubt it's business as usual with the virus fears changing everything around us. My dentist now is Dr. Kevin Williamson. I faintly recall hearing in my family that a few generations back, it was "Williamson" and then the last syllable was dropped.

Pastor Lauren Hauger

I went to Lauren Hauger's church website partly to make sure she was still there. There was a troubling online news article on the KMRS/KKOK site that dropped her name. There was reason to think that maybe, just maybe, she had shown questionable judgment that could, frankly, be career-threatening.
My first reaction to the article was to think highly of the radio station to show such enterprise as to produce such a lengthy piece. It was "true crime" in its tone. Lauren was definitely not one of the central players but she got in on the periphery. Maybe as an accomplice? Maybe just trying to help someone in trouble? That can be commendable, but knowledge of a judge's forged signature, if that was the scenario, would create a serious snag.
A friend from my own church who also knew Lauren and was familiar with the situation, gave me some very good news:
 
I know a little more about Lauren's involvement in the kerfuffle. Her job is not in jeopardy. She was helping a parishioner fax a paper to the courts in Louisiana, she was NOT involved in the forging of the document. Because it was a person who came to her in her capacity as a pastor, she cannot talk about it. She was not charged with any misconduct for this. She feels absolutely terrible about the whole thing. Apparently the forged document had misspellings and grammatical errors that were totally overlooked by the Louisiana people - I figured that's just normal for them! Anyway, they let this criminal woman out of jail and she disappeared. She and her document- forging boyfriend hooked up in Texas, where they lived in a Hispanic neighborhood and were soon caught by an investigator. They were not the brightest bulbs on the tree!
 
I had to wonder if someone at the radio station had a connection to the story in some way. The headline had a dramatic flourish. Normally the radio station material is, while helpful, dry.
It's terrible if Pastor Lauren got put on the defensive. The radio story forced me to inquire about ramifications.
One can easily visit Lauren's church in Park Rapids, with the "Hubbard" name, via the online world and appreciate her work just as if she was still at Federated Church here. I'd like to know Lauren's reaction to the Oak Grove Methodist church that gained infamy by appearing to want to kick out its old members. The church had to actually deny that it was going to physically bar people at the door! Wow.
Our Federated Church is one-half Methodist. That's a curious arrangement, one I don't really grasp, where the other half is UCC. United Church of Christ?
I have stated for a while now that Federated, First Lutheran and Faith Lutheran ought to consider coming together. The same type of people attend all three. Unfortunately the Methodists are still having a silly battle over gay ordination. I would say the parishioners are in a mood to shrug and say "let's just move on from this." The ELCA has done that, establishing a policy that gay people are not going to be discriminated against. Not in the year 2020.
The mainstream Protestant churches of Morris are challenged today because of a couple factors: creation of the Good Shepherd Church as a non-gay-friendly bastion, and the existence of those Apostolics who always seem to promote mixed feelings, at least in my head. The Apostolics are such motivated people who strive to lead such upright lives. Personally I don't see why the women have to look so different. I also think the parishioners have a bent to vote Republican in a knee-jerk way, and this I feel is dangerous. We have people like that to thank for Donald Trump being president. We all may be looking at hell to pay for that.
In the meantime, so many political and other issues are being put aside as trivial while we deal with the wave of anxiety and tragedy with the virus. It put things in perspective, n'est-ce pas? Just like the Great Depression left my parents in a certain frame of mind for the rest of their lives. They knew "small potatoes" when they saw it.
 
Addendum: The KMRS online article that included Rev. Hauger had a pejorative tone in connection to her, IMHO. The reporter even reached out to her. The pastor "wasn't saying much," the article read. The quote subtly suggested that the pastor probably knew of something untoward. Remember, no one is under any obligation to speak to a media reporter. Reporters have no legal standing to summon statements from people. Put bluntly, you have the right to slam the door in their face.
When you say "no comment," a snarky reporter might quote that in a way that suggests complicity in something. However, "no comment" means just one thing: "no comment."
Why allow a writer from the corporate media to put together something with his/her own spin or perspective? What gives them that right? I guess I should feel thankful I'm not in the corporate media anymore. How do I feel about the Morris paper? "I'm not saying much."
Reporters can make typos just like anyone can make typos. Just look at the news today about U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, who has had to backpedal after writing that Speaker Nancy Pelosi was "retarded." He says he meant "ridiculous" and that it was a "typo." Would people have bought that explanation from me, from back when I wrote for the Morris paper?
 
- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com