25 apr

Walked as little as possible today, but nevertheless walked seven times to and from the church to attend, in order: Vigilias, Laudes, Eucaristia, Sexta, Nonas, visperas and Completas. That’s more than my average daily church attendance.
I was the only one of the guests to attend the 6am service (Vigilias). One of the younger monks came to ask me to join them on the seats next to the altar. It was almost intimidating. Here I was, this guy who’s clueless when it comes to the clearly wonderful gift of believing, standing between these men who transformed their belief into the most serene music.

If it was not completely intimidating, it was because of the story that Eduardo told me about one of the older monks, the one who plays the organ masterfully in fact. He has a serious back problem, because of which he walks almost in an angle of 90 degrees. My mother walks straight as an arrow compared to him.
Eduardo told me his fellow brothers (as in priest brothers) tease him and ask him what he’s looking for. I’m looking for God is his answer always. To which they reply. You’re looking for him? You must have found him already a long time ago. You’re a saint already.
The regular services leave plenty of time for other things. Am reading again, finally. Two books in fact. Michael Lewis is the star reporter on wall street fashions. His Flash Boys is about computer trading on stock exchanges. Reads like a train. Am also reading Anthony Beevor about the Spanish Civil War, something I really hardly know anything about. Tried to read Orwell’s Hommage to Catalunya a decade ago, I think, but had walked too much in Barcelona those days to keep focused.
Have also spent time thinking about gluttony, another sin. Eating too much or too little and drinking too much or too little – if anorexia is an eating disorder, why is refusing alcohol not a drinking disorder? – are problems of the times. I am not sure if they cause crises, but here are a few of my thoughts.
I remember a former colleague of mine writing about a plan from Marcel Smits, if that is his name, the former cfo of KPN and ceo of Sara lee, I think. He wanted chief executives to have a yearly alcohol and drugs test. To me the plan itself is proof that this guy is not suited for his task, whatever the task is.
I had to think of the saga around the nomination of a former secretary of defence in the United States. His nomination was challenged because the fact that he had been an alcoholic in the past was used against him. Once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic, was the idea.
A fellow party member, I am pretty sure he was a republican, came forward and asked if the Senate would approve of a candidate with the following drinking habits. Starting the day with a few glasses of champagne, with whiskey diluted water (or the other way around, I forgot) all they long. Wine for lunch and supper, brandy after every meal and I have the feeling this was not the complete list. He was talking about Winston Churchill. Who was, although probably failing Smits’ alcohol test, a rather useful leader in some precarious times in Britain.
Case closed I would say. An alcoholic ceo is not desirable, I would guess. Every addiction makes one vulnerable, I assume. But it must be possible to detect that danger without testing.
The more interesting and damaging sin for managers is greed (obviously) and the far more damaging ones are vanity and pride. If it would only be possible to test someone on those sins. That would make the pool of ‘talented’ topmanagers rather thin, I am afraid. But what a great relief it would be for shareholders. If I only could think of the right test for vanity, I would start a hedge fund tomorrow.