I had the chance to meet a man named Nabil Costa last week. He works for the Arabic Baptist Theological Seminary in Lebanon. His is an incredible story,
I had to confess to Nabil that I did not know nearly as much about Lebanon as I thought. It is a small country. It is roughly the size of two to three good sized counties in Texas. Lebanon has coast line, forests, mountains, and dessert. There are three million Lebanese inside the borders of this country. One third are Christian, One third Sunni Muslim, one third Shia Muslim.
Lebanon lies due north of Israel. Because of conflicts with Israel in the past, Lebanon's relationship with the United States is tenuous at best.
But tucked away in the middle of Beirut, there is a small group of people with a global vision.
They tape bible studies and put them on satellite television for all the Middle East and North Africa to see. They have a high school in the heart of Islamic Beirut. Islamic parents willingly sign a release allowing their children to be taught the Bible. They do this in trade for the quality of education their children will receive.
They have sixty students in their seminary. These are pastors from all of over the Middle East and North Africa. Their belief is simple. People in Tunisia will respond better to a Tunisian Pastor than an American Missionary.
They also have an incredible opportunity at their doorstep. Almost one million refugees have flooded Lebanon from war torn Syria. Most of these are Islamic people. Christians in Lebanon are at the front lines distributing aid to these Muslim refugees. Being able to put aside political differences for the good of people is admirable.
I will lead a group of ministers and laity to Lebanon this September. It will be a trip which will try to raise awareness of the issues Christians face in this part of the world.
It is one thing to be a Christian in Texas. It is quite another to be a Christian in Beirut.
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Frank Underwood...Hero or villian?
It seems that the world sits still on Thursday evenings at 9:00 p.m. That is when Scandal airs; and it will return at the end of February in all of its glory. I would agree that Kerry Washington is a woman of immense talent and beauty. The banter is wicked and fast and the ensemble cast has chemistry. Having said all of that...
For best drama portraying politics in Washington...the winner is...House of Cards! In a land slide.
Season two came out on February 14th. I guess this done so all the singles who did not have dates could watch all thirteen episodes and end up in a chocolate induced, ocular fixated coma, with a subtle smile etched on their faces.
Kevin Spacey is brilliant at portraying Sam Underwood, Democrat congressman from South Carolina. Don't let partisan politics keep you away. This is no West Wing liberal slant. Underwood could be LBJ or Tom Delay. I think he is probably some combination of the two.
Underwood's wife is the stunning Robin Wright who you might remember as "Jenny" in Forrest Gump. Well "Jenny" has grown up and is a tour de force as the congressman's partner and political confidant and silent conspirator. Her Emmy last year gives testimony to her immense talent.
Season 1 is a must if you want to understand the story lines. Thanks to Netflix you can watch all thirteen episodes at your leisure; commercial free. If you want to know what the future of television looks like watch these episodes on your computer or I-phone at Star Bucks and you are there. I have grown so weary of commercial interruptions on regular tv, that this seems like a guilty pleasure to watch all of this uninterrupted and at my own convenience.
The dialogue moves quickly so you will not want to multi task. There are a couple of "tricks" used in story telling that are intriguing. First of all, Frank Underwood narrates much of the story. He breaks the fourth wall and looks directly at the viewer as he narrates the action. This is not Ferris Beuller. This is not SNL. Frank Underwood looks at the screen and speaks to you and somehow it works.
The second trick of the trade is that text messages appear on the screen. If your television is small like mine, prepare to move close enough to see. If not, you will miss crucial dialogue.
There are no charachtures like you find in Scandal. Is there any more annoying character in all of television than Cyrus Beane? The acting is much more subtle and understated in House of Cards. It takes awhile to begin to like these charahcters. They are not easy to like, but like most protagonists, you find yourself rooting for the Underwoods.
This is grown up television. It is not meant for children or young adults. There is not nearly as much violence or profanity as; let's say, a Martin Scorsese movie, but it is present.
Some might watch this and wonder if there is any redemptive quality to it, other than the obvious excellence and craftsmanship of the show. It is a story of power and corruption. Perhaps it is a cautionary tale. That will not be clear until the end of the series. Until then, this can be enjoyed in much the way the Godfather series was. It is of a world that only a very few of us will ever know, but something about it resonates.
Maybe it is because we feel so powerless at times, that we cheer for someone like Frank Underwood. Rather than giving into those in power, he takes and ceases it.
But in the end we are reminded of Lord Acton's famous quote: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
For best drama portraying politics in Washington...the winner is...House of Cards! In a land slide.
Season two came out on February 14th. I guess this done so all the singles who did not have dates could watch all thirteen episodes and end up in a chocolate induced, ocular fixated coma, with a subtle smile etched on their faces.
Kevin Spacey is brilliant at portraying Sam Underwood, Democrat congressman from South Carolina. Don't let partisan politics keep you away. This is no West Wing liberal slant. Underwood could be LBJ or Tom Delay. I think he is probably some combination of the two.
Underwood's wife is the stunning Robin Wright who you might remember as "Jenny" in Forrest Gump. Well "Jenny" has grown up and is a tour de force as the congressman's partner and political confidant and silent conspirator. Her Emmy last year gives testimony to her immense talent.
Season 1 is a must if you want to understand the story lines. Thanks to Netflix you can watch all thirteen episodes at your leisure; commercial free. If you want to know what the future of television looks like watch these episodes on your computer or I-phone at Star Bucks and you are there. I have grown so weary of commercial interruptions on regular tv, that this seems like a guilty pleasure to watch all of this uninterrupted and at my own convenience.
The dialogue moves quickly so you will not want to multi task. There are a couple of "tricks" used in story telling that are intriguing. First of all, Frank Underwood narrates much of the story. He breaks the fourth wall and looks directly at the viewer as he narrates the action. This is not Ferris Beuller. This is not SNL. Frank Underwood looks at the screen and speaks to you and somehow it works.
The second trick of the trade is that text messages appear on the screen. If your television is small like mine, prepare to move close enough to see. If not, you will miss crucial dialogue.
There are no charachtures like you find in Scandal. Is there any more annoying character in all of television than Cyrus Beane? The acting is much more subtle and understated in House of Cards. It takes awhile to begin to like these charahcters. They are not easy to like, but like most protagonists, you find yourself rooting for the Underwoods.
This is grown up television. It is not meant for children or young adults. There is not nearly as much violence or profanity as; let's say, a Martin Scorsese movie, but it is present.
Some might watch this and wonder if there is any redemptive quality to it, other than the obvious excellence and craftsmanship of the show. It is a story of power and corruption. Perhaps it is a cautionary tale. That will not be clear until the end of the series. Until then, this can be enjoyed in much the way the Godfather series was. It is of a world that only a very few of us will ever know, but something about it resonates.
Maybe it is because we feel so powerless at times, that we cheer for someone like Frank Underwood. Rather than giving into those in power, he takes and ceases it.
But in the end we are reminded of Lord Acton's famous quote: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Tuesday, February 11, 2014
I am a flag waving American
It is time for the Olympics again. There is the song with kettle drums and trumpet fanfare. There are the five rings, where supposedly, every nation's flag is represented by at least one of those colors. We have athletes who amaze us with their talent. We also have the medals; gold, silver, and bronze. Oh yeah...and we have politics.
I was fanatical about sports as a child. I especially loved the Olympics; but they were always tainted. I was unable to understand as a seven year old why a black man would raise his fist in the air. I watched in horror as Jewish athletes were taken from their dormitory and killed. I was disappointed when differences could not be resolved and that conflict led to the boycotts of 1980 and 1984.
In those days it seemed that every victory was a national tribute and every loss a disgrace; especially against Russia. The basketball travesty in 1972 was erased by the Miracle on Ice. The cold war of my child hood elevated [or deflated] the Olympics much beyond such a sporting event. This was war.
I watch the Olympics with new eyes. I see the joy of athletic competition. I watched a sixteen year old snow boarder from Stowe, Vermont. My wife and I had coffee at the snow lodge where she learned her craft. She fell on her second run, lost her chance at a medal, shrugged her shoulders and smiled. She will be back in four years.
This was no national incident. It was a sixteen year old who gave it her all and fell just a little short...and I was proud. Not just proud to be an Amercian; but proud of her and her work ethic and her ability to put aside the "agony of defeat" and soak in the moment.
There are still politics. There are fears of terrorism. Accommodations have been woeful in places. The Russians have accused American reporters of reporting these issues to disparage Russia's good name. In reality, we as Americans are somewhat spoiled and reporters are used to having toilet paper and light bulbs. Go figure.
The problem goes deeper than politics. Adults have a way of "projecting" their emotions onto young athletes. What would posses a fifty year old man of wealth to call a nineteen year old basketball player a "piece of crap?" Why would people send death threats to an Alabama kicker for missing a field goal against arch rival Auburn? Why do parents of nine year olds scream at their children at Little League games?
Sports give us an outlet. They allow us to project our anger and insecurity and fears and frustrations on athletes who could not care less how we think or feel. Brad Creed once said: "A college basketball game is 10,000 horribly out of shape fans yelling at ten kids to kill themselves for the sake of glory of their beloved institutions."
Surely we can rise about such sophomoric behavior? Probably not. But this much I know.
The Olympic Games are at their best when they are just that. Games.
I was fanatical about sports as a child. I especially loved the Olympics; but they were always tainted. I was unable to understand as a seven year old why a black man would raise his fist in the air. I watched in horror as Jewish athletes were taken from their dormitory and killed. I was disappointed when differences could not be resolved and that conflict led to the boycotts of 1980 and 1984.
In those days it seemed that every victory was a national tribute and every loss a disgrace; especially against Russia. The basketball travesty in 1972 was erased by the Miracle on Ice. The cold war of my child hood elevated [or deflated] the Olympics much beyond such a sporting event. This was war.
I watch the Olympics with new eyes. I see the joy of athletic competition. I watched a sixteen year old snow boarder from Stowe, Vermont. My wife and I had coffee at the snow lodge where she learned her craft. She fell on her second run, lost her chance at a medal, shrugged her shoulders and smiled. She will be back in four years.
This was no national incident. It was a sixteen year old who gave it her all and fell just a little short...and I was proud. Not just proud to be an Amercian; but proud of her and her work ethic and her ability to put aside the "agony of defeat" and soak in the moment.
There are still politics. There are fears of terrorism. Accommodations have been woeful in places. The Russians have accused American reporters of reporting these issues to disparage Russia's good name. In reality, we as Americans are somewhat spoiled and reporters are used to having toilet paper and light bulbs. Go figure.
The problem goes deeper than politics. Adults have a way of "projecting" their emotions onto young athletes. What would posses a fifty year old man of wealth to call a nineteen year old basketball player a "piece of crap?" Why would people send death threats to an Alabama kicker for missing a field goal against arch rival Auburn? Why do parents of nine year olds scream at their children at Little League games?
Sports give us an outlet. They allow us to project our anger and insecurity and fears and frustrations on athletes who could not care less how we think or feel. Brad Creed once said: "A college basketball game is 10,000 horribly out of shape fans yelling at ten kids to kill themselves for the sake of glory of their beloved institutions."
Surely we can rise about such sophomoric behavior? Probably not. But this much I know.
The Olympic Games are at their best when they are just that. Games.
Friday, February 7, 2014
What Happens When the Moral Majority is Neither
I was a student at The University if Texas in 1980. It was a time of social upheaval in the United States. When I would walk through the West Mall I would listen to impassioned speeches and hear students debate the issues of the day. There were tables set up like the one I sat behind. We were from the Baptist Student Union. Next to us was a table from a group known as Freedom From Religion. Those were great days that shaped my thinking and my world view.
One day I saw a guy wear a t-shirt. The logo said: "The Moral Majority is Neither." It was a reference to Jerry Falwell and a new kind of Christian involvement in politics. The moderate/liberal approach of a Southern Baptist Deacon and peanut farmer from Plains, Georgia was being challenged by a group of conservative Christians who backed candidates like Pat Robertson and the actor turned politico Ronald Reagan. I am not passing judgment on Jerry Falwell, I am just simply saying it is the first time I remember asking the question: "Is the majority always moral? always right?"
I had always lived with the mind set that most people were really alike and the majority view was usually; if not always, the best way. I soon learned that the majority is often wrong. For example; I believe in just war theory. This leaves me in the minority much of the time when it comes to global conflict, but I would argue that more times that not I was on the right/moral, side of the conflict.
I was thinking today about Copernicus who was excommunicated for believing that the world was round and that we are not the center of the universe. I also wonder how generations five hundred years from now will look at the 21st Century Church and shake their heads in disbelief at attitudes and beliefs which are outdated, narrow minded and just plan wrong.
Mark Twain said: "When you find yourself on the side of the majority it is time for reflection."
My favorite social commentator these days is Colin Cowherd. He often says: "I look to see which way the crowd is headed and I head in the opposite direction."
For example; the masses were for Denver. People who bet on the game chose Denver two to one. Denver was a 2 1/2 point favorite. My friend John looked at me right before kick off and asked me this question: "What do the experts think?" My answer? "The wise guys are all in on Seattle." The rest is history.
This is not a blog about betting or football. It is the realization that crowds are easily swayed, People rarely challenge authority. The masses are lazy. They look for affirmation and not information. Too many assumptions are taken at face value. The crowds don't challenge popular thought, they just follow.
It is no wonder that the biblical metaphor used most often of humanity is that of sheep, It is not a compliment. Sheep are basically one taco short of a combination plate. They blindly follow.
So Mark Twain was right. When you find yourself in the majority it is time to take stock. You could be ok, but chances are...
One day I saw a guy wear a t-shirt. The logo said: "The Moral Majority is Neither." It was a reference to Jerry Falwell and a new kind of Christian involvement in politics. The moderate/liberal approach of a Southern Baptist Deacon and peanut farmer from Plains, Georgia was being challenged by a group of conservative Christians who backed candidates like Pat Robertson and the actor turned politico Ronald Reagan. I am not passing judgment on Jerry Falwell, I am just simply saying it is the first time I remember asking the question: "Is the majority always moral? always right?"
I had always lived with the mind set that most people were really alike and the majority view was usually; if not always, the best way. I soon learned that the majority is often wrong. For example; I believe in just war theory. This leaves me in the minority much of the time when it comes to global conflict, but I would argue that more times that not I was on the right/moral, side of the conflict.
I was thinking today about Copernicus who was excommunicated for believing that the world was round and that we are not the center of the universe. I also wonder how generations five hundred years from now will look at the 21st Century Church and shake their heads in disbelief at attitudes and beliefs which are outdated, narrow minded and just plan wrong.
Mark Twain said: "When you find yourself on the side of the majority it is time for reflection."
My favorite social commentator these days is Colin Cowherd. He often says: "I look to see which way the crowd is headed and I head in the opposite direction."
For example; the masses were for Denver. People who bet on the game chose Denver two to one. Denver was a 2 1/2 point favorite. My friend John looked at me right before kick off and asked me this question: "What do the experts think?" My answer? "The wise guys are all in on Seattle." The rest is history.
This is not a blog about betting or football. It is the realization that crowds are easily swayed, People rarely challenge authority. The masses are lazy. They look for affirmation and not information. Too many assumptions are taken at face value. The crowds don't challenge popular thought, they just follow.
It is no wonder that the biblical metaphor used most often of humanity is that of sheep, It is not a compliment. Sheep are basically one taco short of a combination plate. They blindly follow.
So Mark Twain was right. When you find yourself in the majority it is time to take stock. You could be ok, but chances are...
Monday, February 3, 2014
August: Osage County
Last week I snuck out and watched a movie. It was an "ice day" that turned out not to be so icy. I had cabin fever and the afternoon prices fit my budget, so I set off a two hour diversion. Friends had raved about this movie, so I was anxious to see it.
This movie was said to be in the comedy/drama genre. That begins to set expectations. Parts of the trailer seemed funny as well. Once you saw the movie you realize that the trailer was funny only when scenes were taken out of context.
The movie is based on a Pulitzer winning play of the same title, written by Tracy Lett. The cast was amazing. When you see names like Meryl Streep, Julia Roberts, Sam Sheppard, and Juliette Lewis, you know this has the potential to be something amazing.
I watched the movie in the hope that I would have an epiphany or moment of clarity, or at the very least; a really good sermon illustration. I did not find any of these.
The story revolves around a dysfunctional family named Weston, who live in the rural plains of Oklahoma. These people of the land are blessed with a cultured patriarch who is a poet, and some manner of wealth, even if that is in land alone. These advantages are not enough to offset the hurricane that is the inappropriately named Violet Weston.
Meryl Streep is at the top of her craft portraying the aging matriarch who is ill with cancer and deeply addicted to pain pills. Mrs. Streep has played powerful characters in the past few years and you always find a way to be terrified and drawn to them at the same time. Whether it was Amanda Priestly in The Devil Wears Prada or Margaret Thatcher in The Iron Lady, you find compassion for deeply flawed and even abusive characters.
Such compassion never came for me in this film. In many ways she was a victim. We find out about her husband's unfaithfulness and secrets the family has tried in vain to keep from her. One wonders if the pain inflicted caused Violet to become a monster or were the wounds self inflicted.
There is a scene in the home after a funeral, that is both horrifying and hysterical, The problem is it seemed almost irreverent to laugh. It is here when all the chaos comes into full focus. I kept wondering when someone would stand up to Violet and bring an end to this ordeal that felt claustrophobic and unbearable. It is put to an end by eldest daughter, Barbara Weston, portrayed by Julia Roberts. The problem is that in bringing the scenario to an end she looks like the mirror image of the one she abhors. Violet has spawned her own nemesis and she is as scary as the original.
Woven through this narrative is the story of an extended family. You have a daughter who is beautiful but naive and has failed at love countless times. Her fiancé is a drug addict who personifies mid life crisis. Oh yes, he is also a pedophile. The sister is almost as evil as Violet. There is almost no redeeming quality in her at all. Space does not allow us to even scratch the surface of Julia Robert's on screen husband and daughter,
There were two characters in the movie that were captivating. There is one of Violet's daughters, who stayed in Oklahoma and took care of her mother. Ironically, Violet's worst venom is saved for the child who took care of her. She is portrayed by Julianne Nicholson. This daughter is socially awkward and shy and secretive, and wonderfully compassionate. When she is on screen you are drawn to her like a magnet. You rejoice when she is happy and hurt when she is wounded.
The best performance of the movie comes from Chris Cooper. He plays the role of Violet's brother in law. He is the only voice on sanity in this movie. His character is one where you wonder what would he be like in a functional family. His nuanced performance stands is sharp relief to the manic performance of Meryl Streep.
There is another member of the cast that is angelic in her role. She is the house keeper. She watches over this family. ignores the abuse and in the end is left to try and put together the shattered pieces. The one who has the least invested ends up paying a heavy toll.
So what can we say about this movie? Would I go see it again? Should you go see it?
Before spending your money, realize these things. The language is coarse. The action is intense. The dysfunction is unyielding. This is "The War of the Roses" comedy, not a "When Harry met Sally" comedy. The performances by actresses and actors are worth the price of admission. There is something to say about appreciating art for art's sake. Oh yeah...this is not a date movie.
I will go see it again. I am in hopes that I missed something.
My major issue with this movie is simply this; there is no redemption. There is no catharsis. There is no growth or change or development or deeper understanding. There is no hope.
I don't like movies that give no hope. I thought I liked edgy movies. This one left me wanting something more. Maybe I will find that the second time around.
This movie was said to be in the comedy/drama genre. That begins to set expectations. Parts of the trailer seemed funny as well. Once you saw the movie you realize that the trailer was funny only when scenes were taken out of context.
The movie is based on a Pulitzer winning play of the same title, written by Tracy Lett. The cast was amazing. When you see names like Meryl Streep, Julia Roberts, Sam Sheppard, and Juliette Lewis, you know this has the potential to be something amazing.
I watched the movie in the hope that I would have an epiphany or moment of clarity, or at the very least; a really good sermon illustration. I did not find any of these.
The story revolves around a dysfunctional family named Weston, who live in the rural plains of Oklahoma. These people of the land are blessed with a cultured patriarch who is a poet, and some manner of wealth, even if that is in land alone. These advantages are not enough to offset the hurricane that is the inappropriately named Violet Weston.
Meryl Streep is at the top of her craft portraying the aging matriarch who is ill with cancer and deeply addicted to pain pills. Mrs. Streep has played powerful characters in the past few years and you always find a way to be terrified and drawn to them at the same time. Whether it was Amanda Priestly in The Devil Wears Prada or Margaret Thatcher in The Iron Lady, you find compassion for deeply flawed and even abusive characters.
Such compassion never came for me in this film. In many ways she was a victim. We find out about her husband's unfaithfulness and secrets the family has tried in vain to keep from her. One wonders if the pain inflicted caused Violet to become a monster or were the wounds self inflicted.
There is a scene in the home after a funeral, that is both horrifying and hysterical, The problem is it seemed almost irreverent to laugh. It is here when all the chaos comes into full focus. I kept wondering when someone would stand up to Violet and bring an end to this ordeal that felt claustrophobic and unbearable. It is put to an end by eldest daughter, Barbara Weston, portrayed by Julia Roberts. The problem is that in bringing the scenario to an end she looks like the mirror image of the one she abhors. Violet has spawned her own nemesis and she is as scary as the original.
Woven through this narrative is the story of an extended family. You have a daughter who is beautiful but naive and has failed at love countless times. Her fiancé is a drug addict who personifies mid life crisis. Oh yes, he is also a pedophile. The sister is almost as evil as Violet. There is almost no redeeming quality in her at all. Space does not allow us to even scratch the surface of Julia Robert's on screen husband and daughter,
There were two characters in the movie that were captivating. There is one of Violet's daughters, who stayed in Oklahoma and took care of her mother. Ironically, Violet's worst venom is saved for the child who took care of her. She is portrayed by Julianne Nicholson. This daughter is socially awkward and shy and secretive, and wonderfully compassionate. When she is on screen you are drawn to her like a magnet. You rejoice when she is happy and hurt when she is wounded.
The best performance of the movie comes from Chris Cooper. He plays the role of Violet's brother in law. He is the only voice on sanity in this movie. His character is one where you wonder what would he be like in a functional family. His nuanced performance stands is sharp relief to the manic performance of Meryl Streep.
There is another member of the cast that is angelic in her role. She is the house keeper. She watches over this family. ignores the abuse and in the end is left to try and put together the shattered pieces. The one who has the least invested ends up paying a heavy toll.
So what can we say about this movie? Would I go see it again? Should you go see it?
Before spending your money, realize these things. The language is coarse. The action is intense. The dysfunction is unyielding. This is "The War of the Roses" comedy, not a "When Harry met Sally" comedy. The performances by actresses and actors are worth the price of admission. There is something to say about appreciating art for art's sake. Oh yeah...this is not a date movie.
I will go see it again. I am in hopes that I missed something.
My major issue with this movie is simply this; there is no redemption. There is no catharsis. There is no growth or change or development or deeper understanding. There is no hope.
I don't like movies that give no hope. I thought I liked edgy movies. This one left me wanting something more. Maybe I will find that the second time around.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)