A new Lutheran (un)Civil War…

Normally, I am the kind of person who lets news stories and opinions slide.  Initially, I might have a reaction, but after a few minutes, I normally calm down realizing that all opinions should be respected, even if I disagree with the opinion.  I might comment, but I try to be respectful.  I learned from great debaters, like my friends Josh Gunn and John Brown, that if I let my emotions get the better of me and let it cloud my logic, I will become vulnerable to getting schooled.  But there are some situations where my emotions and logic line up together, and those are the moments where even a Chris Bonneau type would need to look the hell out for my wrath.  It’s happening here and now, and unfortunately my wrath is pointed in the direction of the leaders of my religious denomination, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. 

It takes a rare act of stupidity these days to unite the Walkers (my parents, my sisters, and I) in anger and opposition, but apparently LC-MS President Matthew Harrison has done just that.  For those of you who have not heard, Harrison ordered Rev. Rob Morris, pastor of an LC-MS church in Newtown, CT, to apologize to the denomination for participating in a public interfaith vigil attended by President Barack Obama two days after the shooting at the elementary school which killed 26 students and faculty members.  The reason?  Harrison said Morris’ participation in the service “violated the limits set by Scripture regarding joint worship.” 

This garbage again?  Didn’t we in the LC-MS learn our lessons in the aftermath of the 9/11 tragedies in interfaith events at Yankee Stadium and at Valparaiso University?  A national tragedy occurs and the morons leading from St. Louis want to maintain purity at all costs?!?

But wait, it gets worse.  Apparently, there is a sect of the LC-MS denomination, known as The Brothers of John the Steadfast.  This group identifies themselves as confessional Lutherans — church members who stress strict adherence to the Book of Concord, the 16th-century work that defined the central doctrines of Lutheranism.  They were vocal critics of the post-9/11 services and they have shown up again in this situation.  And they were not so kind in their criticisms of Rev. Morris.  From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: 

“One commenter said Morris’s participation in the service “does more harm to the souls of the survivors than any gunman could ever do.”

“Does anyone else agree that Pastor Morris’ action is more abominable than those committed by the gunman?” the commenter asked.

“Yes I do,” (Rev. Timothy) Rossow (a pastor from Naperville, Ill., and Steadfast’s leader) answered in a post that followed. “The gunman killed the body which lasts for 70 or 80 years. ... False teaching and practice kills the soul which lives for eternity in heaven or hell.” ”

Did I mention it is rumored that one of the of the dead in the tragedy likely was a member at Rev. Morris’ church?  For not just fellow LC-MS Lutherans to compare Rev. Morris’ acts to the acts of the gunman, but pastors… well, there’s no easy way to put this… it sounds very much like Westboro Baptist Church speak.  And I guess The Brothers of John the Steadfast don’t think too highly of women, either.

Harrison is up for re-election later this year at the National LC-MS convention.  The Last Convention produced some very controversial results, such as termination of a closer relationship with African-American congregations and the election of Harrison.  The Newtown Controversy just adds fuel to the fire that the fundamental LC-MS Lutherans (largely Midwestern congregations) will be on the defensive in the next convention from the more moderate to liberal LC-MS Lutherans (largely based along both coasts and in the South).  Could this cause a schism among LC-MS Lutherans?  Possibly.

Regardless of the outcome, I fear my sister Sheri is right.  The closer you live to St. Louis, the crazier the LC-MS leadership becomes.  I just worry about the future of the LC-MS’s younger members, many of whom will gather in San Antonio in July.  Will they be content to remain in a denomination that shuns moments of mercy to maintain doctrine purity?

As for me, I threatened last year to leave the Lutheran faith if another Seminex-like controversy flared up.  Now this situation has come up.  What will I and my house do?

Free Wi-Fi Nationwide soon? Better think twice…

Recently, the FCC, led by chairman Julius Genachowski, began to float the idea of a Nationwide Wi-Fi network.  According to the Washington Post: “The federal government wants to create super WiFi networks across the nation, so powerful and broad in reach that consumers could use them to make calls or surf the Internet without paying a cellphone bill every month.”  Naturally, the wireless industry, led by AT&T Mobile, Verizon Wireless, T-Mobile, Sprint, and others are vehemently opposed to the idea, while tech giants, such as Microsoft, Google, and others are pushing the idea.  I won’t quote the entire article, but if you would like to see the article, please click on the following link:  http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-03/business/36728627_1_wifi-networks-wireless-industry-wireless-networks .

It may sound like a good idea on paper, but is it feasible anytime in the near future?  Whose going to build it?  Is it really going to be free?  Can it be secure?  And what about other issues that could effect the network?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there are a myriad of factors that could make the idea of a Super Wi-Fi network nearly impossible, at least immediately.  Consider the following complications:

(1) THERE IS NO CURRENT WI-FI STANDARD FOR THE PROPOSED FCC SUPER WI-FI BAND.  IEEE 802.11 is the standard keepers for the World’s Wi-Fi standards.  There are approved standards at 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz—not 600 MHz as the FCC is proposing.  Now, it may get approved in short order, but we are at least looking at 2 years before the proposed Super Wi-Fi Band is approved (at least).  Plus, Wi-Fi chip manufacturers will have to build to the new specs, and that could take time, up to a year (initially in dongle format, then another year to imbed inside wireless devices).  So you are looking at 3-4 years just to develop the HW to accommodate the standard.

(2) TESTING SUPER WI-FI AT THE NEW 600 MHZ BAND WILL TAKE TIME—AND MAY PROVE THE STANDARD IS NOT FEASIBLE AT SUCH A BANDWIDTH.  Exhibit A:  LightSquared.  This Wireless company proposed using the L-Band (~1.6 GHz) to develop 4G LTE services via satellite to cover the nation.  But testing exposed the potential to disrupt GPS signals used by John Deere and the Military.  Despite arguments from LightSquared that these group were the problem, not LightSquared, Congress and the FCC ultimately suspended LightSquared’s licenses to use the band indefinitely.  LightSquared has since gone bankrupt.  At 600 MHz, the Super Wi-Fi signals could interfere with Digital TV signals on the low side, and smaller Wireless carriers on the high side.  Testing will be very important for Super Wi-Fi, and they will need to get it right.  If they can’t, the network will never be approved.

(3) THE DATA RATES FOR THE NEW SUPER WI-FI WILL STRUGGLE TO MATCH 802.11n/ac SPEEDS.  IEEE 802.11n and 802.11ac are the fastest Wi-Fi standards.  It is highly unlikely that these new Super Wi-Fi data rates will get higher than 50 Mbps initially.  That’s if you’re only using 1 Wi-Fi device with Super Wi-Fi access point.  And with the potential for millions of users to use Super Wi-Fi, you’re probably looking at dozens of mobile devices accessing the same Access Point.  Congestion will be a major problem on a normal day or even a quiet Sunday.

(4) SECURITY, SECURITY, SECURITY.  Wi-Fi networks are extremely vulnerable to cyber attacks in open Wi-Fi hotspots like Starbucks and McDonalds.  Securing a Nationwide Wireless network will be critical, and also prove a challenge.  How do you keep hackers away from knocking someone’s medical device offline or cause a wireless pace maker to go haywire?  Don’t even ask about financial security.  The people responsible for securing such a network may never have a good night’s sleep for the rest of their lives.

(5) BUILDING THE NETWORK MAY TAKE DECADES—AND THE GOVERNMENT ALREADY HAS A WIRELESS NETWORK PROJECT TO DO.  How many people have heard of the first responders network?  Anyone?  First Responders Network is one of the main reasons the FCC forced TV Carriers to go Digital 4 years ago.  Police and Fire Crews need a National Public Network to coordinate in times of crisis.  With everything going to the internet, these first needed BW to support accessing Voice, Video, and Data services.  The network is now being trialed in Las Vegas and Miami by police units, but getting a national networks is at least 5 years away—and they have been talking about this idea for close to a decade.  Can the Government take on two major wireless projects without the 30+ years of experiences companies such as AT&T and Verizon has?

(6) WHO’S GOING TO BUILD THE NETWORK, …  Even if all the equipment were available today, who would put together the network.  Google?  Cisco?  Alcatel-Lucent?  Huwaei?  (Oh, please God, not Huwaei!!)  Awarding the contract to build the network will take some time.  If you split up the building nationwide, then you also have to worry about equipment interoperability.

(7) … WHO’S GOING TO MAINTAIN THE NETWORK, …  As I said, under normal conditions, normal operations will be difficult at best.  But equipment has to be replaced and upgraded regularly.  Will the ones who built the network have the ability to maintain the Super Wi-Fi equipment when the time comes under normal circumstances.

(8) … AND WHO’S GOING TO PAY FOR IT?  The $64 billion question.  Who pays for all of this?  Companies?  Maybe part of it.  Taxpayers?  You’re getting warmer.  New taxes?  Ding, ding, ding!!

(9) FINALLY, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN “UNPLANNED CHAOS EVENTS” OCCUR?  9-11, the East Coast Earthquake, and Superstorm Sandy exposed several weaknesses in the wireless companies’ networks.  9-11 and the Earthquake showed that AT&T, Verizon, and others struggled to keep with the demand of consumers frantically checking on friends and family.  Superstorm Sandy used wind and water to damage or even destroy cell towers and wireline telephone networks, leaving many in desperate need of help without any means of communication.  If such an event were to occur against a Super Wi-Fi, what kinds of challenges would the network have to overcome?

I’m sure others would come up with another set of reason why this may not work in the short term.  A nationwide Super Wi-Fi network may occur, but it won’t be for many years.  So, until then, enjoy your free Wi-Fi at Starbucks and McDonalds.  It’s the closest you’ll get to free Wi-Fi for some time to come.