Luther didn't start the fire, but he's the reason it's still burning.

We are beggars; this is true.

. . . last written words of Dr. Martin Luther, (10 November 1483 – 18 February 1546)

[CONTINUE READING]

Luther didn't start the fire: St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430)

In the year 427/428, St. Augustine endeavored to reevaluate his prolific writings in order to correct them of “anything that offends me or might offend others (Augustine, 8) Among his various corrections and explanations, he offered a new insight into his interpretation of the identity of the speaker in Romans 7.14-25. Referencing his book entitled An Explanation of Certain Passages from the Epistle of the Apostle to the Romans, he states:

In this book I said: “However, when he says, ‘We know that the Law is spiritual; but I am carnal, adequately shows that the law can be fulfilled only by spiritual men, the kind that the grace of God transforms,” I certainly did not want this applied personally to the Apostle who was already spiritual, but to the man living “under the “Law” but not yet “under grace.” For prior to this time, in this was I understood these words which, at a later date . . . I reflected upon this more deeply and I saw that his own words can also be understood about he Apostle himself: “We know that the Law is spiritual; but I am carnal
( 96-97).

The above quote is where Luther got THIS from. . .

Luther didn't start the fire: Girolamo Savonarola (1452-1498)

From here: (born Sept. 21, 1452, Ferrara, duchy of Ferrara — died May 23, 1498, Florence) Italian preacher, religious reformer, and martyr. He joined the Dominican order in 1475 and was sent to Florence to lecture at the convent of San Marco, where he became known for his learning and asceticism. His apocalyptic preaching maintained that the church needed reforming, that it would be scourged and then renewed. After the overthrow of the Medici family (1494), Savonarola became leader of Florence, setting up a democratic but severely puritanical government, notable for its "bonfire of the vanities," in which frivolous materials were burned. He also sought to establish a Christian republic as a base for reforming Italy and the church. He was opposed by the Arrabiati, supporters of the Medici, and by Pope Alexander VI, who attempted to restrain his unusual interpretations of scripture and his claim of prophecy. Savonarola was tried, convicted of heresy (1498), and hanged and burned. Despite popular veneration, attempts to bring about his canonization have been unsuccessful.
[CONTINUE READING]

Another Zinger from Luther

"Someone asked Martin Luther what we contribute to salvation, and he said, 'Sin and resistance!'"

-Michael Horton, in a Christianity Today interview by Mbird's 2011 conference speaker Mark Galli

Luther didn't start the fire: Peter Waldo (1170-1184)

From here: Some men's personal lives are eclipsed by the movements they start. Peter Waldo was such a man. He appears on the scene of history in 1170 in Lyons as a successful businessman who, touched to his core by a traveling minstrel's religious ballad, gave away his money to live in poverty as a preacher of the Gospel. Having persuaded a sympathetic priest to translate large sections of the New Testament from Latin into the regional language, Provençal, Peter wandered through Lyons, bringing the message of Christ to anyone who would listen to him. He soon had the Gospels memorized. A number of young men, impressed by his intelligence and sincerity , followed him in giving away their possessions and found a new joy and freedom in living according to the spirit of the Gospels.

Some priests of Lyons, disturbed by Peter's popularity, tried to curb his activities. Peter appealed directly to Pope Alexander III in Rome. The Pope responded in 1179 by praising the group's poverty but said that because they had no theological training they could preach only if the archbishop of Lyons gave them permission. The Waldenses, as they had come to be known, felt that their message was too important to be checked by traditional Church discipline, and they rejected the Pope's directive. They were excommunicated at a Church council in Verona by the next pope, Lucius III, in 1184.

The Waldenses continued to live by their understanding of the New Testament rather than by the procedures of the Church. They refused to accept the existence of purgatory because it is not in the Bible. They rejected the practice of venerating the saints for the same reason. Not just priests, they said, but any person can consecrate the sacramental bread and wine. They rejected the authority structure of the Church as unbiblical. Their refusal to take oaths and also to participate in war made them unpopular with the secular as well as the Church authorities. Peter Waldo himself was not heard from after his excommunication in 1184. His followers were harassed by the Inquisition. They escaped when possible to the nearly inacessible mountain regions of northern Italy, where Waldo's ideas managed to survive over the centuries despite periodic attempts by Church authorities to eliminate them. More Here.

[CONTINUE READING]

Reformation Rap - The Heidelberg Catechism

Heidelberg Catechism by avoice

Lyrics

Verse 1: Yeah I'm on a mission like a couple spies, and that guys is the reason why I catechize. The good news we almost forgot I recognize, Heidelberg rediscovering the gospel prize. It's not scripture but the truth in it will mention he, introduction hide and seek the 16th century. Written in a time when your mind was the weaponry, this document is back into the populace shouts to Kevin D. Better than you think not as bad as you remember, purpose driven truth, from Frederick the elector. He would initiate, the 129 questions to illustrate truths like Christ propitiates. All in a document, whose purpose was to teach children, a guide for preachers, and confessions in a church building. And this is all fact The Heidelberg Cat has been around but now it's seem like it is coming back.

Hook: We believe in the cross, believe in his life, we believe in his death, believe he's the Christ.

We believe that he rose from grave yes it is him and we read the Heidelberg Catechism

We believe in the after life and we believe nothing's after Christ, so we stand our ground,
Cuz the truth's been around from the word to the Heidelberg.

Verse 2: Year of the Heidelberg resulting in renewed passion, and we could see it in our lives lights camera action. Let's take a gander and address a few questions from Heidelberg document then look at the answers. But before that make sure that, you know how it's broken down, in a Q & A format, a few sections. Suggestions how to read this not to sound promotional, but Kevin put it in his book to make it a devotional. Each question each answer has a bit of commentary, so the application of it is not some involuntary. Mystery, the history screams through rings true but I'll just leave that up to God, cuz that's between you. to believe, but to believe you gotta read you and then you meditate on all the truths that the Heidelberg will illustrate. What's that the catechism homey where you been the good news we almost forgot let's get it in!

Verse 3: From the word to the Heidelberg, we see that what's the comfort of life should come first. And in death that I with, body and soul but belong to the savior, commentary from me man, tell this to your neighbor. Moving on, how many things are necessary for thee, enjoying this comfort, to live and die happily? Three, my sin's misery, deliverance from sin, and gratitude for God is how the answer ends. Let's stretch it out the Lord's day 23 the granddaddy of them all, questions 59 and 60. What good does it do to believe in all this? In Christ I am right heir to the promise. Paraphrase, anyways I'm kinda limited I'm just trying to say a couple things my man Kevin did. On the Heidelberg, go and get you one, and by the way CJ homey this was fun.

Luther didn't start the fire: John Wycliffe (1324-1384)

From here: John Wycliffe lived almost 200 years before the Reformation, but his beliefs and teachings closely match those of Luther, Calvin and other reformers. As a man ahead of his time, historians have called Wycliffe the "Morning star of the Reformation." Born in the 1300s, Wycliffe criticized abuses and false teachings in the Church. In 1382 he translated an English Bible—the first complete European translation done in nearly 1,000 years. The Lollards, itinerant preachers he sent throughout England, inspired a spiritual revolution.But the Lollardy movement was short-lived. The Church expelled Wycliffe from his teaching position at Oxford, and 44 years after he died, the Pope ordered his bones exhumed and burned. Intense persecution stamped out his followers and teachings. It would be hundreds of years before men like Martin Luther resurrected the reforms of which Wycliffe dreamed.
[CONTINUE READING]

Reformation Day Quiz: Punk Rock Edition

Early Reformation Day Quiz: Can you name the man in this picture?

(Note the Stealth bomber bolo tie and unmistakable Halloween-themed Jack T. Chick tract)

Here at Mockingbird, we're always looking for people, places, and cultural artifacts "out there" that reflect the historic truths of the Christian message (helpfully articulated by the Reformers we celebrate every October 31). One such artifact is this quote from the above-pictured former frontman of the super-important punk band, the Dead Kennedys, Jello Biafra:

"For every prohibition you create

you also create an underground."

A major theme here at Mockingbird is the idea that human behavior does not respond well to demand. "Stop that!" "Don't do that!" "Make good choices." In fact, demand to change often provokes revolt, resistance, and rebellion. At best we get reluctant compliance with a huge steaming side helping of subterranean resentment. St. Paul noted this phenomenon in several of his letters to 1st century churches (letters that now make up a major chunk of the New Testament). He wrote to the Romans: "The Law [God's Law for how to behave rightly] came in to increase the trespass" (Romans 5:20). Paul writes about hearing the commandment "Do not covet" and how he was immediately filled with all kinds of covetous desires.

So if St. Paul and Jello are right that demand doesn't create action (but reaction), that prohibition creates an underground, what does change people?

Luther didn't start the fire: Jan Hus (1369-1415)

In celebration of Reformation Day, in addition to Luther, we'll be looking at some of those reformers who are, perhaps, lesser known, but nevertheless paved his way--usually with their lives. One of the pervasive misconceptions about the Reformation is that it was a creation of that fateful day with the hammer in Wittenberg. In fact, as important and decisive as his contribution was, Luther stood on the shoulders of many who had gone before him, people who had been pulling the Papal thread of the re-sewn Temple curtain. Jan Hus was one of these people. From here:

One of Wycliffe’s followers, Jan Hus, actively promoted Wycliffe’s ideas: that people should be permitted to read the Bible in their own language, and they should oppose the tyranny of the Roman church that threatened anyone possessing a non-Latin Bible with execution. Hus was burned at the stake in 1415, with Wycliffe’s manuscript Bibles used as kindling for the fire. The last words of John Hus were that, “in 100 years, God will raise up a man whose calls for reform cannot be suppressed.” Almost exactly 100 years later, in 1517, Martin Luther nailed his famous 95 Theses of Contention (a list of 95 issues of heretical theology and crimes of the Roman Catholic Church) into the church door at Wittenberg. More (of course) here.

Czech this out:)
[CONTINUE READING]

Jimmy Cliff's Heavy Burden

Check this out:

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Jimmy Cliff
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes 2010 Election March to Keep Fear Alive

I love Stephen Colbert! His retort of "I'll take faith and grace" to Jimmy Cliff's desire to be judged on the scorecard of truth and facts is so perfect I almost can't stand it. This interview brings to mind Jesus' words: "Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light" (Matthew 11:29-30).

Jimmy Cliff has decided to "graduate" from religion and wants to be assessed on truth and facts. Well, what are the facts? What is the truth? When the requirements are things like, "Honor your father and mother" and "Love your neighbor as yourself" and "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength," the truth seems to be that we're not doing so well. The facts are that we're coming up a little short. Or...um...a lot short.

To be judged on the scorecard of truth and facts is a hard yoke and a heavy burden. Jesus must, then, be talking about something else. And luckily, he is. Truth and facts lead to a heavy burden because it involves a righteousness required. Jesus says that his yoke is easy and his burden is light because he's talking about a righteousness given. He's talking about faith and grace. Truth and facts mean we're judged on our own merits, or lack thereof. Faith and grace mean that we're judged on Jesus' merits, and judged righteous.

May we always rely on a righteousness that is given and never fear a righteousness that is required. And may we never EVER "graduate" from a yoke that is easy and a burden that is light.

Funny Because It's True

From the 9/13/10 issue of the New Yorker:

St. Paul: "For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment..." (Romans 12:3)

Jesus: "For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person." (Mark 7:21-23, italics added)

St. John: "But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man." (John 2:24-25, italics added)

In other words, the Good News starts with Bad News.

Michael Jackson's Ghosts

With Halloween/Reformation Day almost here, what better time to revisit Michael Jackson's 1996 little-seen opus Ghosts? Conceived as a Thriller-style mini-movie (or maxi-video), the 40-minute "horror" piece never really saw the light of day, and remains unavailable on DVD. Thank God for youtube! Thank God also for Nathan Rabin of The A/V Club, who just published a masterful look at this HIStory-era curio, in an excerpt from his terrific new book, My Year of Flops. If you've never seen Ghosts, I commend it to you for three reasons: 1. It's Michael Jackson 2. The Stan Winston-effects are really something to see and 3. The song "Ghosts" is one of his greatest paranoia anthems, sadly relegated to 1997's (excellent) Blood On The Dance Floor EP. That said, don't get your expectations too high. It's so strange and leaden that you may not be able to watch all the way through (I pity you). I've included a bunch of Rabin's comments, many of which are highly illuminating:
[CONTINUE READING]

Malcolm Gladwell on the Limits of Social Media

An enlightening look at the power, and the lack thereof, of social media technology in The New Yorker entitled, Small Change: Why The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted. As per usual, Gladwell mixes in some provocative nuggets about the human condition:

The platforms of social media are built around weak ties. Twitter is a way of following (or being followed by) people you may never have met. Facebook is a tool for efficiently managing your acquaintances, for keeping up with the people you would not otherwise be able to stay in touch with. That’s why you can have a thousand “friends” on Facebook, as you never could in real life.

This is in many ways a wonderful thing. There is strength in weak ties, as the sociologist Mark Granovetter has observed. Our acquaintances—not our friends—are our greatest source of new ideas and information. The Internet lets us exploit the power of these kinds of distant connections with marvellous efficiency. It’s terrific at the diffusion of innovation, interdisciplinary collaboration, seamlessly matching up buyers and sellers, and the logistical functions of the dating world. But weak ties seldom lead to high-risk activism.
----------------

How did the [bone-marrow registration-related Help Sameer] campaign get so many people to sign up? By not asking too much of them. That’s the only way you can get someone you don’t really know to do something on your behalf. You can get thousands of people to sign up for a donor registry, because doing so is pretty easy. You have to send in a cheek swab and—in the highly unlikely event that your bone marrow is a good match for someone in need—spend a few hours at the hospital. Donating bone marrow isn’t a trivial matter. But it doesn’t involve financial or personal risk; it doesn’t mean spending a summer being chased by armed men in pickup trucks. It doesn’t require that you confront socially entrenched norms and practices. In fact, it’s the kind of commitment that will bring only social acknowledgment and praise.

The evangelists of social media don’t understand this distinction; they seem to believe that a Facebook friend is the same as a real friend and that signing up for a donor registry in Silicon Valley today is activism in the same sense as sitting at a segregated lunch counter in Greensboro in 1960.
----------------

Facebook activism succeeds not by motivating people to make a real sacrifice but by motivating them to do the things that people do when they are not motivated enough to make a real sacrifice. We are a long way from the lunch counters of Greensboro.
----------------

…weak-tie connections… give us access to information over the strong-tie connections that help us persevere in the face of danger. It shifts our energies from organizations that promote strategic and disciplined activity and toward those which promote resilience and adaptability. It makes it easier for activists to express themselves, and harder for that expression to have any impact. The instruments of social media are well suited to making the existing social order more efficient. They are not a natural enemy of the status quo. If you are of the opinion that all the world needs is a little buffing around the edges, this should not trouble you. But if you think that there are still lunch counters out there that need integrating it ought to give you pause.

You Shall Know Them By Their Google Searches: A Venn Diagram

Wowza. Just in case you needed an eye-opener this morning. (I double-checked these, and unfortunately, the diagram doesn't lie). Via blameitonthevoices:

As a footnote, when one googles, "why are atheists so" the results are: stupid, angry, awesome, intolerant, smart, mean, hateful, arrogant, annoying and rude.

October Playlist

1. Slow Emotion Replay - The The

2. Bad Reputation - Freedy Johnston
3. Christ Church Woman - Justin Townes Earle
4. Wax Minute - Michael Nesmith
5. Hard Enough - Brandon Flowers
6. I Shall Call Her Mary - Montage
7. Angela Surf City - The Walkmen
8. Tragic Girl - Weezer
9. Buttercups - Fran Healy
10. In Christ There Is No East Or West - Mavis Staples
11. The Ghost of Rockwood - Belle & Sebastian
12. Follow The Plan - Colin Hare
13. Jug of Water - Honeybus
14. I Walked - Sufjan Stevens
15. Space Captain - Joe Cocker and the Shelter People
16. Roll Away Your Stone - Mumford & Sons
17. Tower of Song - Leonard Cohen & U2
18. Temporary - Slaid Cleaves

God's Controller

Courtesy of Russian artist Vadim Fiskin, via Gizmodo:

Judgment Kills, Love Gives Life - Kate Norris

The final installment in our series of entries from Judgment & Love, here is Kate Norris' chapter. Again, J&L is a collection of 35 true-life stories illustrating the powerful truth that when love is shown in the face of deserved judgment, lives are changed. To order your copy at the reduced price of $10, go here or click on the button at the bottom of the post.

Don’t Go Chasing Waterfalls by TLC was still blaring on the stereo as I watched the hydro pole—a cement telephone pole essentially—crack just above the imploded hood of the Ford Explorer and fall. I looked at my friend Amanda in the passenger’s seat next to me. We had both hit our heads on the windshield but weren’t bleeding. She began to swear in a stage whisper. We were in her mother’s truck. Earlier that day, Mrs. Anderson had handed me the keys: “This is my present to you since you’re only here for a few days.” She had gushed her respect and trust of me as if I were a surrogate parent. I was the first one of my friends in Toronto to get a driver’s license; they had to wait until they were eighteen.

Nicole’s head popped into my window, “I think it’s gonna blow!” She was wild-eyed and also screaming in a stage whisper. “I heard hissing—so I tried to fit my body out the window but I couldn’t so I used the door.” She was hysterical and instilled panic in all of us. All nine of us spilled out of the truck, some through windows and others through doors. We sprinted across a park and into the night shadows. At a safe distance from a potential SUV explosion we turned around and watched. The car was deathly still as it emitted its final pops and moans.

When we decided it wouldn’t actually blow up the boys were interested in one thing only: what lie to tell the cops. As we walked back to the sidewalk Amanda began to cry. She mostly made a foghorn noise, but I managed to hear that she was describing over and over how gruesomely her mother would kill her. I was ready for handcuffs.

I walked up to a neighboring house and explained what I had done and that I needed to use their phone. They had already called the police. All the boys had run off. As a united front, my girlfriends were denying they were there. Each of us had whiplash but nothing else major, mercifully. I called Amanda’s mother. “Mrs. Anderson, this is Kate. I am very sorry but we’ve had an accident. We are all okay, but I wrecked your Explorer—I drove into a pole. I am so sorry…No, no, we’re all sober.” Unfortunately.

I was ready to go to jail and I thought I might. When the police came they heard “the story” from my friends. Then the main officer took me and put me in the back of his police car. “You’re going to tell me the truth,” he said over his shoulder. I told him everything. I took full responsibility. I heard about “kids like me” and how much I had hurt and disappointed everyone’s parents, who had now congregated outside. I heard about how I could have killed everyone. And it was true. I was judged and found guilty.

I suppose I sat in the back of the cop car for forty-five minutes or so. Only Jessica’s dad came up to me during that time. I tried to open the window and then the door, but they were locked. I realized that made a lot of sense, to hold criminals. Jessica’s dad asked the policeman to open the door so he could say something to me. I was ready for the speech I deserved. “You know,” he said brightly, “I totaled a Porsche once when I took it for a test drive.” I began to cry.
[CONTINUE READING]

The Cruelty of Righteous People

Lovely long quote from Reinhold Niebuhr. (HT TitusOneNine)

==============

There is no deeper pathos in the spiritual life of man than the cruelty of righteous people. If any one idea dominates the teachings of Jesus, it is his opposition to the self-righteousness of the righteous. The parable spoken unto "certain which trusted in themselves that they are righteous, and despised others" made the most morally disciplined group of the day, his Pharisees, the object of his criticism. In fact, Jesus seems to have been in perpetual conflict with the good people of his day and ironically justified his consorting with the bad people by the remark that not those who are whole, but those who are sick, are in need of a physician...

The criticism which Jesus levelled at good people had both a religious and moral connotation. They were proud in the sight of God and they were merciless and unforgiving to their fellow-men. Their pride is the basis of their lack of mercy. The unmerciful servant, in Jesus' parable is unforgiving to his fellow-servant in spite of the mercy which he had received from his master.

Forgiving love is a possibility only for those who know that they are not good, who feel themselves in need of a divine mercy, who live in a dimension deeper and higher than that of moral idealism, feel themselves as well as their fellow men convicted of sin by a holy God and know that the difference between the good man and the bad man are insignificant in his sight. St. Paul expresses the logic of this religious feeling in the words:

"With me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not thereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord." [1 Corinthians 4: 3-4]

When life is lived in this dimension the chasms which divide men are bridged not directly, not by resolving the conflicts on the historical levels, but by the sense of an ultimate unity in, and common dependence upon, the realm of transcendence.

For this reason the religious ideal of forgiveness is more profound and more difficult than the rational virtue of tolerance.

--Reinhold Niebuhr, An Interpretation of Christian Ethics (New York: Seabury, 1935), pp. 138-139

Hoping For Superman

An article in the Smithsonian Magazine described recent evidence regarding the 1918 Romanov royal family murders during the Bolshevik revolution. The story also related that there are actually many Russians today who (after 90 years of Communism and "Democracy") want the Monarchy back.

“The monarchy is a romantic idea,” says French historian Mireille Massip, an expert on White Russian exiles. “Democracy is not popular, because democrats turned out to be total losers. Communists aren’t popular. Monarchism is seen as something fresh and fashionable.”

Despite evidence to the contrary that you should not put your hope in human leadership, we always come back to expecting human perfection and competence. But what we get are more losers.

There was only one Superman.

The Secret History of William Axl Rose, Pt 1: Things Get Worse Here Every Day

There are 101 reasons to love Axl Rose. His music, his voice, his antics, his hair, his moves, you name it – all undeniably fascinating. One of the unsung aspects of his career, however, is the extent to which it illustrates the Christian understanding of Judgment and Love. I'm serious. The crushing power of the Law (the omnipresent "oughts" of life), in both its sacred and secular forms, finds unfortunate yet serious traction in the saga of Guns N Roses, with Axl Rose as its main object (and part of its subject). Yet his story also touches on the inspiring nature of love, the beauty and pain of our inner divisions, and even the unshakeable power of the cross. Honest.

Axl grew up in Lafayette, Indiana as the adopted son of a Pentecostal preacher in whose care he experienced a truly merciless form of Christianity, if it can even be called such. All Law and no Grace, in other words, the sort of Bible church situation which majored in behavior control and church attendance, attempting to keep the lid on the human condition so tightly that it caused vicious splits in the lives of its followers. Axl once described it as follows:

"My particular church was filled with self-righteous hypocrites who were child abusers and child molesters. These were people who'd been damaged in their own childhoods and in their lives. These were people who were finding God but still living with their damage and inflicting it upon their children. I had to go to church anywhere from three to eight times a week. I even taught Bible school while l was being beaten and my sister was being molested. We'd have televisions one week, then my step-dad would throw them out because they were satanic. l wasn't allowed to listen to music. Women were evil. Everything was evil. I had a really distorted view of sexuality and women. I remember the first time l got smacked for looking at a woman."

So Axl is sadly the product of the worst kind of religion: ultra-bootcamp Pelagianism compartmentalized to the point of cruelty (not to mention completely at odds with its founder). It wouldn’t be a leap to say that the distance that young Axl had to travel to escape, both geographically and lifestyle-wise, correlates pretty closely to the toxicity of his circumstances in Lafayette. As soon as he could, and after finding out that the preacher in question wasn't even his biological father, he hopped a bus to LA, following his friend Izzy Stradlin, where he proceeded to dive headfirst into one of the more decadent scenes in the country. Or so the story goes. We all know that strict parents often produce rebellious kids, that the Law does indeed tend to increase the trespass, but still, there is only one Axl Rose. And his story just begins there.
[CONTINUE READING]

“A Life Well Planned”: What Might Flannery Say?

Raymond James Financial recently put out this commercial lionizing the “precisely organized retirement,” and it’s a pretty adept depiction of how we Americans so often view life anyways, having “a place for everything,” the self-ordering of life—you can do it, too! Immortality! And not just immortality, but a ceaseless mastery of life through rigorous activities of self-improvement and accomplishment: our figure has “planned for every eventuality,” to be beaten by nothing but her own limitless gaze into the future, at the spritely age of 187! What vigor, what pizzazz! “Despite her years, she had the means to live on as she saw fit.” What’s the secret? A strong plan, of course! Who is in control here? Apparently we are!

The urge was too strong to fight; it’s the perfect beginning to a post-mortem Flannery O’Connor story, without the ending! And yet, the ending’s been written, in her terrific story “Greenleaf.” It depicts a successful Southern woman, Mrs. May, trapped in her privatized conception of how ordered, how grand she is, who “thought the word, Jesus, should be kept inside the church building like other words inside the bedroom. She was a good Christian woman with a large respect for religion, though she did not, of course, believe any of it was true.” She puts everyone in their place, including the landworkers, the Greenleafs, whom she disdains. They are attempting to kill a bull, while she waits in the car, and she begins to get impatient, as her plans seem to be falling out of sort, so she decides to take things into her own hands. Watch the video first, then read this excerpt, as the violence of grace interrupts her.

“Here [the bull] is, Mr. Greenleaf!” she called and looked on the other side of the pasture to see if he could be coming out there but he was not in sight. She looked back and saw that the bull, his head lowered, was racing toward her. She remained perfectly still, not in fright, but in freezing unbelief. She stared at the violent black streak bounding toward her as if she had no sense of distance, as if she could not decide at once what his intention was, and the bull had buried his head in her lap, like a wild tormented lover, before her expression changed. One of his horns sank until it pierced her heart and other curved around her side and held her in an unbreakable grip. She continued to stare straight ahead but the entire scene in front of her had changed…"

Community Goes All Jesus

Just in case you missed this past Thursday's episode of Community, in which Abed makes a meta-Jesus film and the religious humor (and insight) flies, here it is. Certainly the only time I've ever seen a Pharisee joke on network television, Community has slowly become the go-to show for this sort of thing, tackling some genuinely risky subjects in a consistently inventive and very funny way, and with heart. I suspect there is someone sympathetic behind the curtain... Think Friends with a lot more winking self-reference, a surprising penchant for high concepts and a whole lot more absurdity. Enjoy:



Read Todd VanDerWerff's fantastic write-up of the episode on The A/V Club.

Another Week Ends: Altruism, Homer Simpson, Friends, and Dogs

Filling in for DZ this week...

1. Judith Lichtenberg of the NY Times writes this article in defense of altruism over against egotism – known on this blog as a low anthropology. Her critiques of egotism are valid and while she proposes an understanding of altruism which may sound close to Reformation ideas of freedom and love, it instead seems to be a return to Aristotle and the formation of a virtuous identity (ht DZ):

“The point is rather that the kind of altruism we ought to encourage, and probably the only kind with staying power, is satisfying to those who practice it. Studies of rescuers show that they don’t believe their behavior is extraordinary; they feel they must do what they do, because it’s just part of who they are. …As Prof. Neera Badhwar has argued, their identity is tied up with their values, thus tying self-interest and altruism together.”

1a. Speaking of self-perception, a recent study by Dr. Jessica Escobedo has found the people give their actions greater moral worth than their peers -shocking! (ht KW):

“Other data we collected showed that when you're asked to rate your own actions, you rate yourself as about 10 percent more morally good than other people rate your behavior. While this isn't too surprising, we found that if you were asked how other people would rate those same actions, you were remarkably accurate in estimating their ratings of your behavior. In other words, even though you know what other people think of your choices, you still think you're doing better than others give you credit for.”

2. Is Homer Simpson a Roman Catholic? So says this article and the Vatican’s own “L'Osservatore Romano.” As the Vatican magazine suggests: “Few people know it, and he does everything he can to hide it, but it is true: Homer J Simpson is a Catholic”. Who am I to contradict the Vatican on all things Catholic, but this seems like a bit of a stretch (ht DZ).

3. Setting aside political allegiances (honestly), this research article from the Wall Street Journal about the Tea Party movement is worth the read. The author, Jonathan Haidt, sees a strong belief in the notion of Karma amongst conservative Tea Partiers that ultimately underpins their emphasis on personal independence. That’s not to say that all Tea Partiers agree with Karma (Haidt notes that libertarian Tea Partiers largely disagreed with Karma), but given the recent very religious march on Washington, it may be worth it to ask what Christianity has to say about all this. As the article notes (ht JD):

“[In] today's ongoing financial and economic crisis… those guilty of corruption and irresponsibility have escaped the consequences of their wrongdoing, rescued first by President Bush and then by President Obama. Bailouts and bonuses sent unimaginable sums of the taxpayers' money to the very people who brought calamity upon the rest of us. Where is punishment for the wicked?" [CONTINUE READING]

Don't Throw Rhat . . .

Romans 5:20 Now the law came in to increase the trespass . . . .

Overheard last night during debate between ESPN college football analyst Mark May and former Notre Dame coach Lou Holtz about South Carolina's play call late in its game last Saturday versus Kentucky, which resulted in a game ending interception:

May: I totally disagree. You're Steve Spurrier, you're on the road in a hostile environment. They called a timeout before the play. You tell your quarterback they're two things you cannot do.

Holtz: No! No!

May: (1) fumble the ball, (2) throw an interception.

Holtz: No! No!

May: You have the field goal try in the bag. What does he do - he underthrows the fade and throws an interception. You can't turn the ball over.

Holtz: No! No!

May: Turn the ball over you lose. What does he do? Turns the ball over - they lose.

Holtz: You don't ever say "Don't do this!" Because it will happen every time! We're playing Penn State. I've got Tony Rice at quarterback. We put in Jeff Graham. We've got the ball on the 3 yard line. I say to Jeff Graham: "I've got three points on the board. Don't take them off. Don't throw an interception." Guess what happens. Boom! He throws the interception! I put the thought in his mind. You don't say don't do this. . . .

Host John Saunders: It's like standing on the [golf] tee and saying don't hit it in the water. It happens every time.

(More) On Magnolia: Mockingbird at the Movies

I've posted about Magnolia before, but this is a film that bears further examination. One of the most beautiful modern American films, this movie won no Academy Awards, and was only nominated for three (Tom Cruise for Best Supporting Actor, Aimee Mann for Best Original Song, and P.T. Anderson (who also directed) for Best Original Screenplay). Magnolia was released in 1999, so I'm going to assume that no spoiler alert is necessary. That said, if spoiler warnings are necessary, how have you not seen this movie? It's 188-minute running time is an impediment to some, but weren't you willing to sit through Braveheart (177 minutes)? Magnolia is an infinitely better film. Anyway, Netflix it, stream it, get it On Demand, whatever you have to do.

Magnolia is a composite picture of 24 hours in Los Angeles, inter-cutting between seven stories (Anderson famously protested, "Michael De Luca (executive producer) says I'm making a movie with seven stories! I'm making ONE STORY!"), investigating the humanity of the subjects and the way in which they might relate. It boasts some of the finest actors of generation (Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Jason Robards, John C. Reilly, Julianne Moore, William H. Macy, Phillip Baker Hall, Alfred Molina, and the list goes on...) giving some of their greatest performances. The opening sequence is one of the most brilliant ever written or executed. In it, a narrator tells three stories of astounding coincidence, the final one culminating in a boy being noted as an accomplice in his own murder. As the circumstances get stranger, the narrator wonders of these stories can really be "things that happen." Finally, he says that these strange things happen every day. (If you want to watch this wonderful, but slightly NSFW (one f-word), opening sequence, it can be seen in another version of this post HERE)

Surely, the narrator asserts, these things can't just be "things that happen." Surely, "oh, it's just one of those things" isn't always a satisfactory response. Magnolia is a powerful argument for a divine being (specifically God of the Bible) who gets involved. The movie's story (or -ies, depending on whom you ask) and their interconnectedness could simply be written off as coincidence or "just one of those things..." until of course, a rain of frogs begins to fall. While the rest of the story is assuredly strange and improbable, a rain of frogs is beyond that. It's impossible. We would all agree that THAT is NOT part of the set "things that happen." That's NOT "just one of those things." That's an intervention from the outside.

And it's not just intervention for intervention's sake. It brings estranged people together, it knocks sense into people, and gives people purpose. It comes to those who are in need. And if these clues aren't enough, the Aimee Mann song for which she was Oscar nominated is called "Save Me." Further, the most powerful song of hers in the movie, "Wise Up," goes from, "It's not / What you thought / When you first began it / You got / What you want / Now you can hardly stand it though / By now you know / It's not going to stop / 'Til you wise up" to "It's not going to stop / 'Til you wise up / No, it's not going to stop / 'Til you wise up / No, it's not going to stop / So just...give up."

Did you get that? It goes from "Wise Up" to "Give Up." This is the call of the Christian. Recognize that without God getting involved (which he does, spectacularly), our wising up is sure to fail. It's only in giving up that we can be saved.

Scientists successfully teach gorilla that it will die some day

Following on from DZ's earlier post on talking to kids about God and all the moral/ethical/theological issues surrounding it, here is a genius piece from The Onion about teaching a gorilla about the concept of mortality:

“Wake me up inside…” (part 3c): Karl Barth’s Doctrine of Reconciliation (iv.1.58)

(iv.1.58.2 cont.) * Thirdly, Hope: The tertiary form of the being of humanity in Jesus Christ is “the positing and equipping of man as the bearer of the divine promise”, which constitutes Christian hope. And it is Christian hope which is the teleological** determination for humanity and the Christian in Christ. Christian hope is more than Christian vocation (the traditional protestant/Lutheran understanding of the result of justification and sanctification), it is the moment that the person is given the promise of God in Jesus Christ. The person is called along side their justification and sanctification, and thus given true hope, “…this being as such is a being under the promise, that the reality of the salvation given to man is as such the gift of this promise, that the Christian affirmation and appropriation of the divine gift is as such hope based upon and directed to this promise”.

However, this third form is not an end in itself, but only a beginning. In conjunction with faith and love, Christian hope signifies the teleological direction of the person in Christ: it is a looking forward to the activity of God (the promise). Justification (looking back to God’s activity in the divine verdict, faith) and sanctification (seeing God’s activity as present, love) have a teleological determination that is oriented toward the promise, hope (though hope is not an end in itself). “…it is in fact the case that the being of man in Jesus Christ is a being not merely in possession and action but also in expectation”, it is not only that God has made something of the person in Jesus Christ nor that He has caused them to walk before Him, but that He also “wills to make something of him, He has for him a purpose, an end”. [This purpose does not need to be found; it is realized in Christ, because Christ is our teleological ordering.] And it is this purpose and this end that is the promise of God. In to this promise of God, the Christian is “called”. Thus “calling” is part of Christian hope and part of the reconciliation of humanity to God.

But what is the “end” to which Christian hope/calling directs the person? It is toward the “actualization and preservation of the fellowship between God and himself established in the fulfillment of the covenant”. In other words, it is directed toward “eternal life”, to their “actual future with God”. But “with God” does not mean merged into or becoming like God; rather it is being fully human with God. The teleological end must coincide with the activity of God. Since God is the active ruler and humanity are those who were created to worship Him, to serve Him, to adore Him, the teleological end encompasses this as its foundation of the relationship, “To live under Him in His kingdom and to serve Him: it is here that all rest and joy and contemplation and adoration in the eternal life promised to man have their meaning and basis. It is the calling to this which is the telos of justification and sanctification”. The teleological end of humanity in Christ will not obliterate humanity’s creatureliness, but rather perfect it. The promise points to the end which will be the fulfilled relationship between humanity and God, where humanity will be an active subject in that relationship and fellowship with God (as a faithful worshiper (etc.)) of God, “a being in man’s own free responsibility with God for the cause of God”. Christians under the promise of the teleological end in Christ with God are the bearers of true hope: hope not only for their own futures, but the future of the whole world. The fulfillment of this teleological end will always be God’s activity toward us and not of our own. While we move toward this teleological end in the present, it is not by our ability or what we offer to God, but by the direction of the promise and the power of the Holy Spirit. The event of this promise and direction toward the teleological end is a permanent event (as are the divine verdict and direction).
[CONTINUE READING]

Three Particularly Fine Christian Music Album Covers

Taken from a list of 60 Awesome Christian Music Album Covers (a number of which, I'm proud to say, have already appeared on this site in some context). ht MG:

PZ's Podcast: The Gothic

EPISODE 19

I've been thinking about this subject for 50 years, but only recently I think a little light has dawned.

In other words, I begin to understand now, in my head, what my ten-year-old Celine-Dion heart understood right from the beginning.

We're talking about the Gothic, the "Gothic" strain in literature and movies -- the spell cast by the Gothic on all who behold it with unveiled face.

What is the Gothic? Quoting The Oxford Book of Gothic Tales: "A Gothic tale will invoke the tyranny of the past (a family curse, the survival of archaic forms of despotism and of superstition) with such weight as stifle the hopes of the present (the liberty of the heroine or hero) within the dead-end of physical incarceration (the dungeon, the locked room, or simply the confinements of a family house closing in upon itself)."

Podcast 19 looks at three of the Gothic tales of Irvin S. Cobb, including the one story of his that is still read today; Ray Russell's tetanus shot of a tale, Sardonicus, together with his lame though harrowing novel "Absolute Power" (which I would not recommend); Roger Corman's delving interpretations of the Edgar Allan Poe cycle; and that masterpiece of Gothic television, "The Guests", from the original The Outer Limits. The latter combines Luana Anders, Jack Kerouac, an Alien Brain, Gloria Grahame, Christianity, and the original Norman Bates house. (It's Perfect, in other words.)

Moreover, what do the fans tell us? What are the millions of fans telling us? And what is the substance of the Gothic saying about us? That is the question.

Podcast 19's answer? Something in the line of 'Row, Row, Row Your Boat'.

To listen click here. To subscribe, here.

BONUS QUOTE: From Michael Moorcock's introduction to his 1996 Tales of Terror and the Supernatural:
[CONTINUE READING]

Fight the Power

In case you missed it. From the LATimes: The artist known as Banksy is famous for his stealth graffiti projects that mix social commentary and subversive street art. In keeping with his rebel persona, Banksy's guest "appearance" on "The Simpsons" on Sunday night [Oct. 10] was an unpredictable affair that mixed the anarchically humorous and the deadly serious. Banksy helped to design the opening credits for Sunday evening's episode. . .Banksy created an extended sequence that took viewers on a hellish tour of sweatshop labor in Asia. Workers are shown toiling away on animation cels and merchandise tie-ins for the hit Fox series. (It just so happens that "The Simpsons" outsources much of its animation to South Korea.)The final image shows the Twentieth Century Fox logo standing big brother-like over a militarized police zone.

You can see it all here. The discussions resulting from the airing of this opening sequence have almost exclusively centered on the question as to how Fox would allow (much less fund) such a disparaging portrayal of itself. Well, with coverage here, here and here, the cynics of the “any publicity is good publicity” school certainly have their answer, but so do advocates/fans of what is known as “culture jamming.” Whatever the case, I think that anytime a Unicorn gets taken down a few notches, it’s fine with me:)

From our perspective, stay with me here, the freedom that was given to Banksy and the willingness Fox showed is the same as that afforded Christians towards the church by the Doctrine of Justification by Grace through Faith alone. Part of Fox's freedom, no doubt, came from their confidence that many of the critiques were unwarranted; however, there was something deeply Protestant about the whole pre-episode episode.

As the vestiges of Christendom continue to fall away and (as if we needed a survey to tell us that), many people--uncomfortable with the lack of controls (read: Law) placed upon those to whom the Gospel is proclaimed---have beaten a hasty retreat into the arms of external authorities. These authorities--like circumcision did in Galatia--seem to provide safe-haven from the storms of post-modernity, pluralism, and Ru Paul's Drag Race. Fifty years ago, Gerhard Ebeling, also observing this sort of weakness, commented that it manifested in a variety of ways: “a new theological dogmatism and traditionalistic confessionalism, high-church clericalism and sacramentalism, an over-simplification through insistence on pietistic edification or else through catchword theology, radicalism, confessional rhetoric, etc.” Not much has changed.

Far from championing some sort of neo-Gnostic Huffington Post type “spirituality of hugging” on one hand, or a moralized “follower of Jesus” on the other, this emphasis on Justification by Faith Alone and, in particular, the proper distinction between Law and Gospel, provides courage to proclaim the death and resurrection of Christ in the face of a world that is chained to unbelief masquerading as pious religiosity, to a world that is enslaved to the Law. That we would be unable to afford God His due without recourse to if/then purpose-driven eudamenism, formulaic religious structures, or baptized sociological dogma is a curse of the Fall. BUT, that people abuse and turn the Gospel into vague sentimentality, hedonistic license or empty, self-serving platitudes is not as bad as turning it into a Law. Misused freedom is a problem; the absence of freedom is a tragedy.

[CONTINUE READING]